This essay aims at analyzing the problematic of justice from the subjectsØpoint of view. The author argues that justice is first of all a matter of subjects. In other words, it is a problem of choosing and siding with the faithful subjects. He divides subjects into five categories: faithful subjects,reactionary subjects, opponent subjects, the subaltern, and inmin subjects, of which the faithful subjects are the most genuine bearers of history. He suggests three major historical tasks that the faithful subjects carry out. They are the building of peace and reunification, the constructing of equality and justice in society; and the protection of ecological integrity. They are at least partly interconnected and exist in the context of national division. The author examines the trajectory of the faithful subjects in the Korean history. The Donghak peasant revolutionary war in 1894, the March 1st Movement in 1910 and others were considered here as typical historical events where faithful subjects were involved. He also examines the trajectory of the opponent subjects and others. He finds some meeting points between the faithful subjects and the inmin subjects. He argues that the dialogues and exchanges of the latter two groups of subjects are necessary and required for expanding the space for peace, reconciliation,and reunification between North and South Korea. The author claims that justice is to make clear the differences between/among different groups of subjects. The widening of the gap and difference between different groups of subjects is not the final goal of justice. The ultimate goal and structure of justice is love. Justice in a narrow sense widens the differences between/among groups of subjects in order to clarify different subjectivities and their historical trajectories. Justice in a wider sense reunites all subjects, because justice includes love and reconciliation as its requisites. The author argues that two principles, presentation and representation for minjung must be balanced in our society and that the balance and dialectic of the two principles will contribute to building a new democracy alternative to the inhuman jungle-like liberal democracy (South Korea) and to the rigid and controlled socialist democracy (North Korea). Finally, the author finds Jesus as the model of presentation and representation for others. His cross can be seen as an event of presentation (direct participation in the suffering situation) and representation for poor and suffering people. The author also analyzes Jesus and his events from the subjectsØpoint of view.