[손해배상][집15(3)민,238]
Cases not deemed to be negligent on the part of a espionage or the perpetrator who has mistakenly mistakend the victim;
If the perpetrator, in the event that the perpetrator: (a) was aware of the victim as a espionage or a espionage; (b) caused the risk of harming the other party due to the absence of response, he/she was negligent on the perpetrator, barring special circumstances that the perpetrator, barring any special circumstance, committed a espionage or a fluor, by regarding the place or time during which the accident occurred; and (c) the place or time during which a espionage or a fluor
Article 2 of the State Compensation Act, Article 750 of the Civil Act
Sl. Sl. Sl.
Korea
Seoul High Court Decision 66Na2418 delivered on April 26, 1967, Decision 66Na2418 delivered on April 26, 1967
Of the original judgment, the part against the defendant is reversed;
The case portion is remanded to the Seoul High Court.
The grounds of appeal by Defendant Litigation Performers are examined.
According to the judgment of the court below, the court below found that the non-party 1 was guilty on the ground that the non-party 2 was not at least 10 meters old since the non-party 1 was on the knives knives gun, where the non-party 2 was on the knives gun, and that the non-party 1 was on the knives gun, where the non-party 2 was on the knives gun, and the subsequent knives, and the remaining knives were on the knives, and the non-party 2 was on the knives of the knives without immediately responding, and the knives of the counter-party 2 were on the knives of the knives gun, and the non-party 2 was on the kives of the above kives of the above knives and kives of the defendant without any special reason.
Therefore, according to Article 406 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Mag-Jak Park Mag-gu