[손해배상][집20(3)민,095]
In addition to the fact that the perpetrator was not subjectively willing to perform his/her duties, and even if it is objectively objective, if the perpetrator is a soldier's status and even if the accident occurred during the initial working hours, it cannot be viewed as a tort committed by referring to the perpetrator's act in the performance of his/her duties.
In addition to the fact that the perpetrator was not subjectively willing to perform his/her duties, and even if it is objectively objective, if the perpetrator is a soldier's status and even if the accident occurred during the initial working hours, it cannot be viewed as a tort committed by referring to the perpetrator's act in the performance of his/her duties.
Article 2 (1) of the State Compensation Act
Plaintiff 1 and five others
Korea
Busan District Court Decision 72Na48 delivered on June 29, 1972
The original judgment shall be reversed, and
The case shall be remanded to the Daegu High Court.
The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.
According to the facts established by the judgment of the court of first instance, the non-party 1 and the victim non-party 2 were in the position of guard or disease belonging to the military base distribution guards as they are identical to the defendant, and the above non-party 1 were in the same duty at the 16th and 20:00 of this day of this accident, and they were in the same duty at the 17th and middle of each of the above guard, and approximately 3 minutes were in mind at the middle of both elementary stations, and they were in a large amount of spathn and spathn with each of the above primary stations, and they were in front of the above judgment, and the non-party 1 was in front of the judgment of the court below that the non-party 2 was responsible for damages caused by the non-party 1's act of misunderstanding the total spathn and spathn with the fact-finding of the victim's spathn, and thus, the non-party 1 did not have an objective act of spreading the victim's.
Therefore, the original judgment is reversed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Kim Young-chul Kim Young-ho (Presiding Judge)