Reversion of the right to control operation during the repair period for the motor vehicles entrusted for repair;

In a case where the driver of a vehicle requests the repair of the vehicle, the driver's right to control the operation of the vehicle during the repair period shall be deemed to be the repairer, barring special circumstances. Therefore, it is difficult to deem that the driver of the vehicle is negligent for the driver on the ground that the driver requested the repairs of the vehicle on the wire-line and left the place without the horse. The above wire-line is an unqualified maintenance business entity. The employee is also the vehicle of the store located immediately adjacent to the above wire-line, and the driver is the vehicle of the shop located immediately adjacent to the above wire-line, and the vehicle is parked in the front hole while requesting the repair work, and the vehicle's owner is not deemed the operator of the vehicle even during the repair period.

Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, Article 750 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Dong-young et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellant-appellee)

Dr. Hasung et al.

Attorney Lee Jin-jin et al., Counsel for defendant-appellee

Busan High Court Decision 88Na8432 delivered on October 19, 1989

The part of the judgment of the court below against the defendant shall be reversed and that part of the case shall be remanded to Busan High Court.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the defendant used the above 2-day labing vehicles to repair the above labing vehicles using the above labing labing labing lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab lab la.

However, in the case of a request for repair of a motor vehicle, the right to control the operation of a motor vehicle during the repair period shall be deemed to be the repairer unless there are special circumstances (see Supreme Court Decision 87Meu1585, Jun. 14, 198). Thus, it cannot be deemed that the driver of a motor vehicle owned by the defendant requests the repair of the motor vehicle for the repair of the motor vehicle and leaves the motor vehicle without the word at the place, and the driver cannot be deemed to be the negligence as stated in the judgment, and the defendant cannot be deemed to be the operator of the motor vehicle even during the repair period of the Raditer, and the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles concerning the manager of the operation of the motor vehicle, which affected the judgment.

Therefore, the appeal pointed out this point is with merit, and the part against the defendant is reversed and remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all Justices who reviewed the appeal.

Justices Kim Yong-sung (Presiding Justice)