Relationship between the State Compensation Act Article 2 and the employer's liability under Article 756 of the Civil Act

If there is liability for damages under Article 2 of the State Compensation Act, it is excluded from the provision of Article 756 of the Civil Code on employer liability, so it is necessary to meet the requirements of Article 9 of the State Compensation Act.

Domins

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 3 others

Gwangju High Court Decision 74Na302 delivered on January 24, 1975

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal.

According to the records in this case, if a public official inflicts damages on another person by intention or negligence in the course of exercising public authority by the State or local government, the State or local government is liable for damages under Article 2 of the State Compensation Act, and if Article 2 of the State Compensation Act is applied, the provision of Article 756 of the Civil Act concerning the employer's liability for damages shall be excluded (see Supreme Court Decision 4294Sang1083 delivered on March 15, 1962). In light of the records, the cause of the plaintiff's claim is 667 above ground wooden-dong, Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Gwangju-dong, 10th and 10th and 10th and 2nd, 5th and 9th and 5th and above, even if the building was constructed through legitimate procedures as the plaintiff's ownership, the defendant Si concluded this building as an unauthorized building and determined as the non-exclusive building, and thus, the plaintiff's claim for damages caused by an unlawful act by removal of 30 and above 50th and above.

Therefore, the plaintiff can claim compensation under the State Compensation Act against the defendant Gwangju City, and can not claim compensation for the employer under the Civil Act. Therefore, the court below's dismissal of the plaintiff's main action on the ground that the main action did not meet the requirements for the transfer under Article 9 of the State Compensation Act shall be justified and shall not be employed to argue that the original judgment is attacked under the above different opinions.

Therefore, this 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 Justices on the bench.

Justices Yang Byung-ho (Presiding Justice)