Since survivor benefits paid by the State under the Pension for Public Officials Act are paid to public officials based on the social security system for public officials, there is no relation to tort compensation.

The Supreme Court en banc Decision 67.7.11 67.1 67Da1030, 69Da58 (No. 1433 of November 1, 63) revised by the former Public Officials Pension Act (amended by Act No. 1433 of November 1, 63), which was paid by the State pursuant to the former Public Officials Pension Act (amended by Act No. 1433 of Nov. 1, 200), is a private guarantee system for public officials, and there is no relation with compensation for damages caused by illegal acts, and therefore, the amount of bereaved family benefits paid in accordance with this Act shall not be deducted from the amount of consolation money.

Articles 39 and 44 of the former Public Officials Pension Act, Article 750 of the Civil Act, Article 752 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 66Da874 Delivered on June 26, 1966

Plaintiff 1 and two others

Korea

Busan District Court Decision 68Na531 delivered on December 31, 1968, Decision 68Na531 delivered on December 31, 1968

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds for appeal by the defendant litigation performer.

The survivor's benefits stipulated in Articles 39 through 44 of the Pension Act (including assistance to bereaved family members as the issue in this case) will be paid for the purpose of establishing a social security system for public officials and contributing to the improvement of the economic safety and welfare of the bereaved family members by providing appropriate benefits for the death of the public officials as specified in Article 1 of the same Act. Therefore, the two systems differ from the one for paying the above survivor's benefits and for compensating the damages suffered by the public officials or their bereaved family members due to the death of the public officials. Accordingly, in a case where a public official dies due to a tort of another public official in the course of performing his duties, the deceased's survivor's bereaved family members were succeeded to the right of compensation of the deceased public official and received compensation from the State or from the State for damages caused by the deceased person's bereaved family members under the Pension for Public Officials Act (see Supreme Court Decision 60Da1684, Jun. 28, 196; Supreme Court Decision 2006Da1679796, Jun. 16, 297).

In this case where the deceased non-party 1, who was a state public official, died of a tort during the performance of official duties of another state public official, the non-party 2, the actual wife of the non-party 1, has already received the bereaved family aid under the Public Official Pension Act. Thus, the defendant's appeal to the effect that the amount equivalent to the bereaved family aid of this case should be deducted from the amount of damages claimed by the non-party 1's father, mother, and the plaintiff who is the mother, should be deducted from the amount of damages claimed by the plaintiff, is not accepted, and the judgment in the same conclusion is justified. (The original judgment is judged to be erroneous to have the nature of consolation money for the bereaved family members who

Therefore, this appeal is dismissed without merit. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

The judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Dog-dong and Kim Jong-dong Dog-dong and Kim Jong-dong Dog-Jakngng, Kim Jong-gu, Kim Young-gu, Hong-han, Kim Young-han, Kim Jong-young, Kim Jong-young, Kim Jong-young