100 and 2 others

2. 00

3. 00

19.5. Payment of 5% per annum and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. The plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed.

3. One-half of the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs, and the remainder by the defendants.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

D. The sum totaling KRW 50,00,000 and each of the above amounts to 00,000,000 shall be paid in full from April 1, 2006.

By the day, 20% interest per annum shall be paid.

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or each entry in Gap's evidence 2 to 5 (including branch numbers), Gap's evidence 1 to 25, and Eul's evidence 2 can be admitted in full view of the whole purport of the pleadings:

(a) Relationship between the Parties

Plaintiff 00, 000 is the parent of the deceased 000 (hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”), and Plaintiff 00, 000, 000 is the father or child of each deceased.

B. On February 14, 2006, the Seoul detention center classification officer, who was in charge of the review of parole on the deceased, who was in prison due to a tort, committed sexual indecent act by attempted kis, with his chest and tack, and the deceased suffered injury such as acute stress disorder in the number of treatment days due to its shock in the above detention center classification review room around 00.

C. Death of the Deceased

Afterward, the Deceased, who was suffering from mental stress due to the above illegal act, was killed on March 11, 2006, after he attempted suicide by breaking the neck as the roof in the detention house on February 19, 2006.

D. As the Deceased died, Plaintiff 00, 000, and 000 succeeded to the instant lawsuit as co-inheritors of each deceased.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. Grounds for liability for damages (1)

From the examination of classification of the deceased on February 1, 2006 by the Seoul detention center's Classification Division 000 on February 1, 2006, the deceased was forced to commit an indecent act by force, such as the deceased's chest, her turb, etc.

On March 1, 2006, the death of the deceased on March 11, 206, who was absent suicide in the detention house, was classified as above. In full view of the entire purport of the arguments on the deceased's evidence Nos. 1, 6, 18, and 23, abnormal crimes were committed several times from around July 25, 2005 to the time of the above detention center's work. The head of the division of the above tort was 00 to the above crime prevention of sexual harassment by the deceased, and 00 to the above crime prevention of the death of the deceased, and 00 to the Seoul detention center's duty of care was found as a result of the above suicide prevention of the death of the deceased, and 00 to the Seoul detention center's duty of care was found as a result of the above suicide prevention of the death of the deceased, and the head of the division of the Seoul detention center's duty of care was 0 to the 200th day after the death of the deceased.

In addition, the division review division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division division and security management division should have been able to take appropriate disciplinary action against 000. However, it was urgent to reduce and conceal the case, and eventually, it provided one cause for the deceased to proceed to suicide act.

In addition, after the above tort, the deceased showed a considerable mental shock such as an increase in the amount of gold, and as a result of the intensive examination of the deceased, "it is necessary to pay attention to the possibility of suicide due to acute stress disorder and depression disorder" was diagnosed, so the head of the above detention center and the responsible officer in charge of the above duties who are obligated to protect and supervise inmates was hospitalized, and neglected to take appropriate measures to prevent the aggravation of the symptoms or the occurrence of suicide or other accidents, by strengthening observation of the times.

Thus, the defendant is obliged to compensate for all damages suffered by the deceased and their families according to the name of the deceased as well as his/her family, because the deceased, who is a prisoner, was unable to have mental stress due to an unlawful act committed in the above duties by the relevant public officials, including the Classification Agency 000 and the Seoul Detention Center Director, and committed suicide.

(2) Limitation of liability

On the other hand, even if the deceased received a considerable mental impulse due to the tort in this case and a series of unfair treatment by relevant public officials, it would have been possible to take a solution differently as an adult female under the age of 34 who has two children. However, it is recognized that the deceased contributed to the occurrence and expansion of damages caused by the tort in this case by selecting the extreme method of suicide. Therefore, it is reasonable to take into account the above circumstances in determining the amount of damages that the defendant should compensate for. Accordingly, the defendant's liability ratio is limited to 80%.

(b) The scope of damages (i) the daily revenue (a) the recognition of which is made;

1) Gender: The date of birth of a woman: April 6, 1971.

3) Age at the time of an accident: The name of a term lease of 34 years old or older (4 November 5): career experience and monthly income: 47.13 years old and monthly income: Urban daily wage (22 days in operation days);

6) Cost of living: Calculation of 1/3 of income (b).

From March 11, 2006, which was the death date of the deceased, until April 5, 2031, 203. After deducting the interim interest at the rate of 5/12 per month from the lost income for the period of January 7, 203, which was the end of operation, the day of operation of the deceased, and after deducting the interim interest at the rate of 5/12 per cent per month, the conversion into the present price at the time of death, the amount of gold KRW 157, 49 ( = 1,215,54 won x (1 ? 1 / 3) x 1 x 1 x 3457 x 194 x 194) shall be deemed as follows:

(2) Limit of liability (A) Defendant’s ratio of liability (b) 80%: 125,92, 399 won ( = 157, 490, 499 won x 80%) (3): The deceased’s age, career, circumstances and result of this case; the degree of the deceased’s negligence; the relationship between the plaintiffs and the deceased’s family relationship; and the Defendant’s efforts for recovery of damage (the employees of Seoul Regional Correction Office and Seoul Detention Center collected KRW 23,057,90 in total as hospitalization expenses and funeral expenses, etc. for the deceased) do not conflict between the parties; according to each of the statements in the evidence No. 2-1 through No. 4, the Plaintiff’s signature and treatment expenses from the wife on February 15, 2006 to other facts revealed in the oral argument of this case).

(B) Deceased: 10,00,000 won (C): each of the plaintiffs, 8,000,000 won (D) 2,000 won, 2,000,000 won

[Ground of recognition] A without any dispute, entry in the evidence Nos. 5, 1, 2, and 11, and the pleading are made before the pleadings. Inheritance ratio (1): Plaintiff 00 (3/7), 000 (2/7), 000 (2/7), 200 (2/7) (2) Plaintiff 00: 58,282, 457 won [125, 92, 399 won + 10,000 won + 3/7] Plaintiff 38, 854, and 97 won [29, 90, 900 won] x 125, 399 won x 3/7]

D. Sub-determination

Therefore, the defendant as compensation for damages amounting to 60, 282, 457 won ( = 58, 282, 457 won + 2,00,000 won + 46,854,971 won each for the plaintiff 00, 000, 46,854,971 won ( = 38,854,971 won + 8,000,000 won + 8,000,000 won each for the plaintiff 1, 206, and each of the above amounts claimed by the above plaintiffs as of the date on which the deceased died. < Amended by Act No. 7891, Apr. 1, 2006>

5. By up to the limit of 5% per annum under the Civil Act and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claims against the defendant are justified within the above scope of recognition, and they are partially accepted, and each remaining claims are dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Judges Park Jong-dae

Judges Kim Gung-do