Final Ruling Confirms Distinction Between Consolation Money and Damages for '5·18 Mental Compensation', Impact Expected on Similar Lawsuits

Martial law troops deployed to Geumnam-ro during the May 18, 1980 incident [Image source=Yonhap News]

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] A Supreme Court ruling that broadly recognized the scope of state compensation by distinguishing consolation money already received from damages for mental suffering related to the May 18 Gwangju Democratization Movement has been finalized. This is expected to have a significant impact on similar lawsuits where victims and the state dispute the nature of consolation money and damages.

According to the court on the 7th, the Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Park Jeonghwa) dismissed the appeal without oral argument last month in the damages claim appeal filed by five May 18 merit recipients, including Mr. A (61), thereby confirming the lower court's partial ruling in favor of the plaintiffs. Dismissal without oral argument is a system where an appeal is rejected without substantive review if there is no special reason such as a serious violation of law in the lower court's ruling.

The court ruled that the state must compensate Mr. A and others, who suffered harsh treatment from martial law troops during the democratization movement, with consolation money and damages for mental suffering amounting to approximately 41-58% of the claimed amount, ranging from 40 million to 100 million KRW each.

Previously, Mr. A and others, who received compensation in the 1990s under the May 18 Compensation Act, filed a damages claim lawsuit asserting mental suffering. However, Article 16, Paragraph 2 of the former May 18 Compensation Act stipulated that if the applicant agreed to the payment of compensation, it would have the effect of a 'judicial settlement' under the Civil Procedure Act.

During the first trial, Mr. A's side requested a constitutional review, arguing that this provision excessively restricted the state's right to claim damages by deeming a judicial settlement to have been established for all damages, including mental suffering. In May last year, the Constitutional Court accepted their claim and ruled the provision unconstitutional with a unanimous decision.

Despite the Constitutional Court's ruling of unconstitutionality, the trial for Mr. A and others did not conclude. New issues arose regarding the consolation money already received and the criteria for calculating damages. The state argued that "since consolation money was received in prior compensation, it should be deducted when calculating damages." In fact, the judgments on whether to distinguish between damages and consolation money varied among courts handling similar damages cases filed by other May 18 merit recipients, resulting in significant discrepancies in the recognized scope of damages.

However, as the case involving Mr. A and others was finalized with the recognition that damages and consolation money should be considered separately, thereby broadening the state's compensation responsibility, other merit recipients' lawsuits are also expected to be influenced. In the case of Mr. B, another May 18 merit recipient whose appeal trial is ongoing at the Seoul High Court, the state argued in August that it should await the Supreme Court's decision on Mr. A's case. The court initially scheduled the next hearing for December but moved it up to this month following the finalization of Mr. A's appeal.

The law firm 'Gamdong Euro,' representing Mr. A and others, stated, "We thought the trial would conclude immediately after the Constitutional Court's ruling of unconstitutionality, but due to the state's repeated appeals, the case went all the way to the Supreme Court." They added, "If damages and consolation money were not separated, the state's compensation responsibility could have been too narrowly limited, but the res judicata (the binding effect of a final judgment) resulting from this Supreme Court ruling will also affect other lawsuits."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.