74Da2065 Compensation for damages

(1)*

(2)*

(3)*

(4)*

(5) *

(6)*

Plaintiff*,*,* as a minor, the legal representative*

Korea

Daegu High Court Decision 74Na60 delivered on November 6, 1974

July 30, 1975

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

(1) We examine the grounds of appeal by the defendant performer.

(A) Determination on the first ground for appeal

"A public official is subject to performance of his duties" under Article 2 of the State Compensation Act shall be interpreted as a public official's act that objectively shows that he belongs to the scope of his duties or is closely related to his duties. The reason for the instant accident duly recognized by the court below shall be interpreted as the case where the public official is forced to perform his duties. The reason for the instant accident is as follows: * The Army of the Army under the jurisdiction of the headquarters* the defendant * the 19:30 tons of the date of the original judgment after completion of his duties, * the plaintiff * the plaintiff * who was absent from the workplace with two other officers on the 1/4 tons of the 1/4 tons of the 19:30 tons of the 1/4 tons of the 1/4th of the 196th of the 19th of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 3nd of the 3nd of the 19th of the 2nd of the 19th of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 1st of the 3th of the 1st of the 2nd of the 19.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below to the same purport is just and the judgment of the court below is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the performance of public officials under Article 2 of the State Compensation Act. There is no ground to

(B) Determination on the second ground

The court below's decision that the plaintiff * paid the medical expenses 1.50,000 won and consolation money 1.50,000 won to the plaintiff * agreed not to hold all the responsibilities arising from the main accident in the original judgment, and that the settlement was exempted from the financial body for damages arising from the accident in this case, such as the theory of litigation, the agreement between the plaintiff and the above litigant cannot affect the defendant that can be viewed as having the relationship of joint and several liability with the above litigant. Thus, the court below's decision on this cannot be said to be erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles of vicarious and several liability in theory in the original judgment.

The essay is groundless.

(2) Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

The presiding judge of the Supreme Court shall be a civilian judge.

The Supreme Court Judge Red Domins

Chief Judge of the Supreme Court

The Chief Judge of the Supreme Court