beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs falling under the following order shall be revoked.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for amendments to the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, the reasoning for this Court’s explanation is as follows.
▣ 제1심판결문 제3면 제17행과 제18행 사이에 아래와 같은 내용을 추가한다.
“E. Plaintiff A filed a claim for criminal compensation on the ground of the aforementioned acquittal judgment (Seoul Central District Court 2018Da127). On August 23, 2018, the above court decided to pay the Plaintiff A the sum of KRW 27,628,00 of the criminal compensation amounting to KRW 25,40,000 and the compensation amounting to KRW 27,628,000,000 for the criminal compensation amounting to KRW 25,40,00. The above decision became final and conclusive (hereinafter “decision on criminal compensation”).
).』 ▣ 제1심판결문 제3면 제18행의 ‘마’를 ‘바’로 고친다.
▣ 제1심판결문 제3면 제20행의 ‘22호증’을 ‘22, 27호증’으로 고친다.
The reasoning of this Court’s argument is that the reasoning of the first instance judgment is identical to that of the second instance judgment, except for the modification as specified below. Thus, the reasoning of this Court’s argument is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
▣ 제1심판결문 제4면 제4행의 ‘구금하고’부터 ‘범하였다’까지를 ‘불법구금하였고, 조사 과정에서 고문 등 가혹행위를 하였으며, 원고 A에 대한 검찰수사 및 재판에 부당하게 간섭하였다’로 고친다.
Article 10 of the Constitution, including the legal principles related to the establishment of tort liability, provides that human dignity and value, the right to pursue happiness, the obligation of the State to guarantee the fundamental rights of the State, the personal liberty in Article 12, the arrest and detention by law, the principle of no punishment without law and the due process of law (Paragraph 1), the prohibition of advisers and the right to refuse to make statements unfavorable to them (Paragraph 2), the arrest and detention by warrant issued by the judge (Paragraph 3), the right to assistance of counsel (Paragraph 4), and the limitation of admissibility of confession