logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2017.03.30 2016가단5214240
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 200,000,000 as well as the Plaintiff’s annual rate of 5% from March 9, 2017 to March 30, 2017.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The status C and the Plaintiff are the siblings born between C and his father D and his mother, whose father is his father, and the Plaintiff is C’s partner.

B. C’s investigation and trial proceedings 1) A is a Korean national residing in Japan born in Japan from the F, who was studying in the college of the Seoul National University on December 2, 1975, and the Army Security Headquarters under the Defendant’s control (hereinafter “Security Company”).

(2) The security investigator detained C without a warrant from January 17, 1976 when a warrant of detention issued by a judge was executed, even though the investigator did not have the authority to investigate C, who is a civilian status, and investigated C from the loss or loss of the security investigator’s South-North Dong-dong by January 29, 1976.

3) An investigator belonging to a security officer: (a) fabricated evidence by means of false confession from C to the effect that he/she committed an act of harshly harsh treatment, such as making it impossible for C to be save and properly locked during the investigation process; and (b) fabricated the evidence by deceiving C to the effect that “a espionage was committed to detect and collect national secrets by locked from members of an anti-government organization; and (c) subsequently denying the facts charged after C was prosecuted, thereby threatening C to have the psychological suppression situation of C continued until the trial stage. (d) The case related to C et al. was sent to the prosecution on February 4, 1976. The co-suspects, including C et al. did not have received the assistance of counsel at the time of investigation; and (c) the co-suspects, including C, did not make any statement contrary to or denying the alleged facts other than repeated statements made before the prosecution or each written protocol of suspect examination by the prosecution prior to the transfer; and did not even make any unlawful confinement or harsh acts by the security investigator affiliated with the investigation officer.

5 Prosecutions, on February 23, 1976, violate the National Security Act, etc.

arrow