1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts are recognized in each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 to 10, Eul evidence Nos. 1 to 18 (including paper numbers):

[1] Around January 1952, the Plaintiff’s attached B died, and around July 1990, the Minister of Patriots and Veterans Affairs prepared a public protocol on the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”).

The contents of the above public protocol are as follows: (a) the deceased planned an independent tax demonstration from a senior executive officer of the Eastern group and prepared a majority, such as an independent declaration, etc. on March 18, 1919; and (b) the deceased started an independent tax demonstration with many military groups on March 18, 191.

It was recognized that he had been arrested for one year of imprisonment with prison labor and had contributed to the garment of the Order of Merit for National Foundation.

Accordingly, on August 15, 1990, the President led the Deceased to the Order of Merit of National Foundation.

At the time of the above prosecution, a medal (No. 1) certificate was issued under the name of the President, and the name of the President, the Prime Minister, and the Minister of Government Administration was stated in this medal, and the official seal of the President and the Minister of Government Administration was stamped.

[2] From around March 2004, about 14 years ago, the Special Act on Finding the Truth of Anti-National Acts under the Japanese colonial Rule was enacted around March 2004.

On November 2009, the Committee for Finding the Truth of Pro-Japanese Acts announced a list of 1,005 pro-Japanese actors, and around December 2009, the “Research Institute of the Korean National Issues of Incorporated Association” published the list of 4,389 persons.

Around February 2010, the Defendant sent to the Plaintiff a document (No. 18-1) stating the “Guidance for the Submission of Materials Related to Publicities of Persons of Distinguished Services to Independence” (No. 18-1), which was included in the list of persons of distinguished services to the Plaintiff, and was contained in the above list of persons of distinguished services to the Plaintiff, so the Defendant changed the delivery of the supporting documents, and notified the Plaintiff that the supporting documents were reflected in the Committee’s review to discuss whether the deceased’s public defects were

[3] On November 11, 2010 and November 15, 2011, the “Examination Committee for Revocation of a decoration of an independent merit” belonging to the Defendant against the Deceased.