Cases where a harmful act cannot be objectively deemed an act during the performance of official duties;

In a case where a driver’s disease, under the direction of a driver, 8 work soldiers on board under the direction of a middle-class soldier Gap and she gets on board, and she is frightened, such as a driver’s disease, and she is operated on the part of a driver not for the purpose of operation, not for the purpose of operation, and she is in the operation of she is in the operation of her ship, and she is in the operation of her ship, she is in the operation of she is in the operation of her ship, she cannot be deemed an act of performing public duties by objectively viewing the driving act of the above driver’s.

Article 2 (1) of the State Compensation Act

Plaintiff 1 and one other

Korea

Seoul High Court Decision 67Na753 delivered on August 16, 1967, Seoul High Court Decision 67Na753 delivered on August 16, 1967

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

We examine the Plaintiffs’ agent’ grounds of appeal.

The facts determined by the court below are as follows with regard to the developments leading up to the occurrence of the instant military vehicle accident. In other words, Nonparty 1 was ordered by the Water Defense Headquarters 30 on Nov. 2, 1964 to provide educational assistance to the said 30 large-scale military vehicle, and eight work soldiers including Plaintiff 1 under the command of Nonparty 2 on board the said large-scale 3 large-scale military vehicle, and it is difficult to see the court below as follows: (a) it is difficult to view that the above act of driving the vehicle was an act of driving the vehicle under the direction of Nonparty 1 on the 30 KKM, which was an act of driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol; (b) it is difficult to view that the above act of driving the vehicle was an act of driving the vehicle under the direction of Nonparty 1 on the 1, 2010, which was an act of driving the vehicle under the influence of alcohol, and thus, it is difficult to view that it was an act of driving the vehicle under the direction of the court below.

Therefore, this appeal is without merit, and all costs of appeal are dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party.

This decision is consistent with the opinions of the involved judges.

The judge of the Supreme Court is Hong Dong-dong (Presiding Judge) and Dong-dong (Presiding Justice)