Defendant Republic of Korea shall pay to Plaintiff 1 an amount at the rate of five percent per annum from April 29, 1969 to January 13, 1970 to the full payment of KRW 27,698 on the amount of KRW 1,584,80 and the amount of KRW 1,557,110 on the amount of KRW 27,69 to the amount of KRW 861,40 on the amount of KRW 861,404 and the amount of KRW 5 percent per annum from April 29, 1969 to the full payment.

The plaintiffs' remaining claims against the defendant Republic of Korea and the defendant Busan City are dismissed, respectively.

The costs of lawsuit between the plaintiffs and the defendant's Republic of Korea shall be eight minutes through the first and second trials, and the remainder shall be borne by the same defendant, the plaintiffs, and the part arising between the plaintiffs and the defendant's Busan City shall be borne by the plaintiffs through the first and second trials.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant, etc.

A provisional execution may be carried out only under paragraph (1).

The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs through the first and second trials.

In addition to the above facts, the non-party 2, who has no driver's license, shall not drive the vehicle without a driver's license, and even if the driver was driven urgently for the operation of the vehicle, the driver is anticipated to show the front left and left-hand turn on the four streets from the road where the traffic of the vehicle occurred, and thus, the driver was obliged to exercise the duty of care to prevent the occurrence of the accident so that he could pass through without the accident even if the obstacle appears, but he was negligent, left the driving vehicle, and caused the accident to go against the delivery and caused the accident. If the driver goes on the right-hand side of the vehicle, whether there is distinction between the driver's driving experience and the left-hand side of the vehicle, the driver is not obliged to take the duty of care for the illegal act of the plaintiff, and the driver is not obliged to take the duty of care for the illegal act of the non-party 3, who is the public official of the Republic of Korea, and the driver is not obliged to take the duty of care for the illegal act of the plaintiff.

However, as the above fire fighter non-party 2 is a state public official, and as long as the fire fighting duty is a state administrative affairs, the Busan City Mayor is entrusted to the State, and the Busan City Mayor shall direct and supervise the public officials belonging to the State to the extent of performing the delegated affairs, so the responsibility for the accident of this case shall be the State only under the State Compensation Act, and the responsibility for the defendant Busan City shall not be responsible to the defendant Busan City. Thus, the plaintiffs' claim against the defendant Busan City shall not be accepted without considering the remaining points.

In view of the plaintiffs' property damage to be compensated by Korea, Gap 2 (No. 6) evidence No. 16 (Simplified Life Table No. 13) No. 13, and the whole purport of the testimony of the non-party 4 and the party arguments of the court below, the deceased non-party 3 is a common health person who is over 17 years old and 4 months old at the time of birth, and the average remaining life of Korean male is 46.6, barring special circumstances, it is possible to survive up to 63 years old and completed military service under the Military Service Act 23 to 55 days old, and the average monthly income of the non-party 25 days old is no more than 9 years old, and the non-party 4 was no more than 9 years old and no more than 25 days old and less than 30 days old and the average amount of the non-party 2's daily income of the deceased for 196.8 months old as of the time of the closing of argument.

Next, in relation to consolation money, the plaintiffs were able to find out the facts that the plaintiffs were able to give birth to them, and that the mental health disorder caused by the plaintiffs to stroke the above Gap 2's testimony and the whole purport of oral argument, the plaintiff et al. owned the above witness Gap 4's testimony and the above witness Gap 2, and the plaintiff 1 had about 20 million won, while running the three transportation businesses in Busan, and the plaintiff 1 had 6 or son and son are only 3 readers who died in this accident, and his mother is not able to give birth to them. Further, the plaintiff 2, who was her mother, can find out the fact that the above deceased was 3 years of construction civil engineering and civil engineering of the commercial and industrial high schools, and that the above deceased was able to be paid at least 30 million won, considering all the circumstances revealed in the above accident and the record of the case.

Accordingly, Defendant Republic of Korea is clearly obligated to pay to Plaintiff 1 the amount of KRW 1,584,80 and KRW 1,57,10 of the amount at the Plaintiff’s request, whichever is 27,69, from April 29, 1969 to April 29, 1969, with respect to KRW 27,698, the amount of which is 1,557,100, and KRW 861,404, and the amount of which is 861,404, and the damages for delay from April 29, 1969 to September 29, 196, to the Republic of Korea, to the extent that the above amount is sought against Defendant 1, the above amount is justified and the remainder of the claim against Defendant and the claim against Defendant Busan is rejected. The judgment of the first instance does not coincide with this part of the part against the Defendant’s obligation to pay for the damages to Defendant Busan, which is revoked by applying Article 96 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Judges Kim Tae-tae (Presiding Judge)