Second Lieutenant is able to serve by promotion in order for each prescribed period until the retirement age of Captain reaches the different years for rank retirement.

According to Article 29 (1) of the Military Personnel Management Act, the promotion of officers shall be selected by the committee for selection of officers eligible for promotion. According to the proviso to Article 26 (2) of the same Act, the number of persons to be promoted shall not exceed 1/10 of the members with the rank higher than the pertinent rank. Thus, according to the interpretation of the above provision of the same Act, the promotion of officers does not naturally take place as a matter of course, but falls under special circumstances. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the deceased shall be deemed

Articles 26 and 29 of the Military Personnel Management Act

Plaintiff 1 and one other

Korea

Seoul Central District Court (65 Ghana12168) in the first instance trial

(1) The Defendant’s cancellation of the part against the Defendant’s loss exceeding the Defendant’s payment of 450,000 won to Plaintiff 1, 250,000 and 5% annual interest rate from August 3, 1965 to the full payment date.

(2) The plaintiff et al.'s remaining claims are dismissed.

(3) All the costs of lawsuit shall be divided into three parts of the first and second trials, one of which shall be borne by the defendant, and the remainder shall be borne by the plaintiff, etc.

The legal representative of the plaintiff et al. of the plaintiff et al. shall pay to the plaintiff 1 the amount of 1,310,650 won, the amount of 705,325 won, and the amount of 5 percent per annum from August 3, 1965 to the full payment system. The plaintiff et al. of the plaintiff et al. sought a judgment and a provisional execution order that the litigation cost shall be borne by the defendant.

The part against the defendant among the original judgment shall be revoked.

The plaintiff et al.'s claim is dismissed. The court of first and second instances claimed that all costs of lawsuit should be borne by the plaintiff et al.

(1) Comprehensively taking account of Gap evidence Nos. 2-1 (Judgment), 2-2 (written confirmation), 3-3 (Verification Protocol), and 4 (Medical Certificate), defendant Ho-gu's Head Office of 15th Army, Byung Byung-gu's Head Office 1, who is a driver of the Army, 3/4 tons, and 53, the victim's Army contact points to the Army Headquarters at around 9:0 a.m. of August 2, 1965, when the defendant started operation to Seoul and tried to use the vehicle at 10 p.m. of Gyeonggi-do's Government City 101 p.m., and the point at 135 p.m., the point at 10 p.m., the point at 8 p.m., the point at 10 p.m., the point at 10 p.m., when the defendant passed the 100 p.m. to the port, the defendant cannot be found to have a duty to compensate the victim for damages due to an accident.

(2) Furthermore, we examine the amount of compensation for damages. According to the above item (a) above, since there is no dispute over the establishment of the above amount of compensation for property, evidence Nos. 1, 2 (Simplified Life Table), 1, 7-1, 8-2 (Notice of Construction), and 9-2 (Method of Payment of Salary) of the court below's witness Nos. 1 and 9-2 (Method of Payment of Salary), it is obvious that the victim No. 2 would be entitled to receive the above amount of compensation for damages every 6-year period after deducting the monthly average amount of remuneration for the above officers No. 1 and 3-year period for promotion from the above 10-year period of time of accident. Thus, according to the above item (i) above, it is clear that the victim No. 1 and 3-year average amount of remuneration for the above officers will be less than 3-year period of time after the above 10-year period of time of occurrence of the accident. Thus, it is interpreted that the above amount of compensation for the defendant No. 1 was less than 18-year period of time of time.

Therefore, the above deceased's 20 years after completion of the so-called rank retirement age, namely, 10 December 1967, i.e., 29 years and 55 years after 25 years after 100, 29 months (348 months) appears to have been able to gain profits equivalent to agricultural wages by engaging in at least agricultural labor. At the time of the conclusion of this argument, the facts of 200 won per day are obviously 5,00 won per month and can be operated for 25 days per month in light of the empirical rule, and it is obvious that 2,086 won per month would have been deducted from 20,000 won per month from 10,000 won per month to 30,000 won per annum 20,000 won per month (the above 30,000 won per annum 1,000 won per month from 20,000 won per annum 7,000 won per annum 5,000.

(b) As to the claim of consolation money for the plaintiff et al., the plaintiff et al. is easily known in light of the empirical rule that he suffered mental pain as his parent due to the death of the non-party 2, the defendant is obligated to pay consolation money to the plaintiff et al. for the amount of such mental pain. Thus, considering the academic background, family environment, status relationship with the plaintiff et al. recognized by the non-party 3's testimony, and all other circumstances shown in the arguments of this case, it is reasonable that the defendant will pay 50,000 won to the plaintiff et al. for the amount of consolation money.

(3) In the same way, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 1 a delay civil damages with an annual rate of 50,000 won from August 3, 1965 to the full payment date, and the remaining claims shall be justified within the above recognized limit, and since the court below's judgment that differs from this conclusion is improper since the defendant's failure other than the defendant's original judgment that has been properly maintained at the court court is revoked pursuant to Article 386 of the Civil Procedure Act, and 250,000 won from 20,000 won from 250,000 won from 20,000 won from 20,000 won from 196,000 won from 196,000 won from 196, 196, 92, and 92, 9, and 30,000 won from 19,000 won from 19,000 won from 20.

Judges Kim Byung-su (Presiding Judge)