logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2014.04.24 2013가합507271
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The defendant shall list the remaining plaintiffs except the plaintiffs A, B, C, and D's claim amount and the quoted amount table.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. At the time of the outbreak of the Korean War, the case of sacrifice for inmates, such as Gwangju District Office (1) was committed, and the so-called police officers, such as offenders of the National Security Act and persons related to the Jeju 43 Incident, were accommodated in the prison nationwide. However, after the outbreak of the Korean War, the case of murder of those police officers or police officers who were employed by the Defendant was committed in prison or prison. From the beginning of July 1950 to July 23, 1950 in the case of the Gwangju District Office, the military personnel or police officers were killed in the military police station in the vicinity of Gwangju District, and from the beginning of July 23, 1950 to the beginning of July 23, 1950, in the case of the Gwangju District Office, the military police officers or police officers were killed in the area of the Daejeon High Military Police Station from around 1,500 to the beginning of the Korean War Station at the time of death of those serving in prison, from around 7,000 to the fourth District Police Station.

3) On July 1950, many military police units, etc. of the relevant regions, including the police stations belonging to the Daegu, Kimcheon-si, and the police stations belonging to the Dong-dong Police Station, and the members of the Gyeongbuk-dong Police Station of the relevant regions, among the inmates who were confined to the punishment office in Daegu, Kimcheon-dong, and Ansan-dong regions, were killed collectively (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “each of the above cases”) by bringing a large number of inmates who were confined to the punishment office in the relevant regions to various locations of the relevant Si/Gun, including the National Report Federation, etc., which was directly examined in their regions at the time, and instead, according to the trial procedure, etc. (hereinafter collectively referred to as the “the aforementioned cases”).

arrow