beta
Text
1. On August 27, 2010, the Defendant’s decision to dismiss the payment of consolation money, etc. against the Plaintiff is revoked.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be.
Reasons
1. Details of the disposition;
A. On May 1, 1943, the Plaintiff’s death net B (CB, hereinafter “the deceased”) was forced to be mobilized as labor in the Japanese region, and returned to North Korea since 1945. At the time of the Korean War, the Plaintiff got escape to South Korea, but the Deceased was left North Korea.
According to the Korean Red Cross's investigation, the deceased is confirmed to have died, but the time of death cannot be known.
B. On November 17, 2009, the committee for ascertaining the truth of the mobilization damage under the Japanese colonial Rule notified the deceased as the victim of forced mobilization under Article 17 of the former Special Act on Finding the Truth of Forced Mobilization Damage under the Japanese colonial Rule (amended by Act No. 10143, Mar. 22, 2010; hereinafter the same). On the same day, the Plaintiff applied for the payment of consolation money under Article 4 of the former Act on Support for the Victims, etc. of Forced Mobilization before and after the Pacific War (amended by Act No. 10143, Mar. 22, 2010).
C. On August 27, 2010, the Defendant succeeded to the duties under Article 3 of the Addenda of the Special Act on the Investigation into Force Forced Mobilization during the Pacific War and the Support for Victims of Mobilization by Foreign Forced Mobilization (hereinafter “Special Act”), and dismissed the Plaintiff’s application for consolation money on the ground that “The deceased was forced to be mobilized as a labor in the Japanese region on May 1, 1943, but it is recognized that “the deceased was forced to be mobilized as a labor in the Japanese region, but falls under the category of “a person who does not have the nationality of the Republic of Korea” under Article 7 subparag. 4 of the Special Act on the Establishment of the Family Register in North Korea.
(hereinafter referred to as "disposition of this case"). 【No dispute exists, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and Eul evidence No. 1, 6, 8, 9
2. Whether the instant disposition is lawful
A. The Plaintiff’s assertion (1) The Deceased’s assertion is based on the old Japanese colonial rule.