(a) The amount of damages, when owned property has been destroyed or damaged due to a tort, shall be calculated by using the exchange value, repair cost, or reduced exchange value at the time of the tort as ordinary damages;

(b) The case holding that there was an error of incomplete hearing or a violation of the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence in recognizing the damages for the restoration of gasoline from the ground and the geological features of the ground.

(a) The amount of damages when the property owned by the tort was destroyed or damaged;

The exchange value, remuneration expenses, or reduced exchange value at that time shall be calculated with ordinary damages.

나. 유조탱크 차량의 탈선전복으로 휘발성이 강한 휘발유가 흘러내려 화기에 인화되어 즉각적으로 화재가 발생한 것이라면 비록 일시에 다량의 휘발유가 흘러내렸다 할지라도 타서 없어졌을 것을 쉽게 알아차릴 수 있고 휘발유가 흘러내린 장소와 원고의 과수원까지는 상당거리가 있음을 짐작할 수 있는 것임에 비추어 위 사고로 기름이 원고의 과수원(900평)에 스며들어 그 지질을 원상으로 복구하려면 평당 금 400원이 소요되는 사실을 인정하려면 그만큼 많은 분량의 휘발유가 그 부근 일체지면을 흠뻑 적실 정도로 쏟아져 내렸다거나 즉시 인화되지 않고 땅속까지 스며든 한참 만에 화재가 발생하였다는 등의 사정을 조사해보지 아니하고서는 할 수 없는 것이다.

Article 763 of the Civil Act; Article 393 of the Civil Act; Article 187 of the Civil Procedure Act

Supreme Court Decision 70Da649 Decided September 22, 1970

Plaintiff 1 and two others

Korea

Daejeon High Court Decision 70Na640 decided September 23, 1970

Of the original judgment, the part concerning the damage from lost profit and the expenses for geological restoration in orchard against the eligible subject owned by the plaintiff 1 shall be reversed, and the part shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The defendant's remaining appeals are dismissed.

The costs of the appeal on this part shall be borne by the failure of the appeal.

The grounds of appeal No. 1 by Defendant Litigation Performers are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, in calculating the amount of damages against plaintiff 1's 39 weeks of damage, the court below recognized the fact that the total amount of damages of 16 weeks of damage on the part of plaintiff 1 should be changed to the new subject about 13 weeks of damage on the part of half 30,000 won per share and the amount of 30,000 won per share of death on the part of half 13 weeks of damage on the part of plaintiff 1, and recognized the fact that 390,000 won per share of total amount of 390,000 won per share of damage on the part of plaintiff 1, and recognized the remainder 16 weeks of damage on the part of the remaining 5 years of full loss and 5 years of damage on the part of the total amount of actual profit from the 20th to 20th.

However, the amount of damages when the ownership of the property was destroyed or damaged due to a tort shall be calculated by using the exchange value, remuneration cost, or reduced exchange value at the time of the tort as ordinary damages. Barring special circumstances, future damages shall not be the amount of damages (see Supreme Court Decision 70Da649, Sept. 22, 1970; Supreme Court Decision 70Da649, Sept. 2, 1970); and the subject shall be able to substitute as in the original market. However, the court below calculated damages for each share of 29 shares of the damaged subject which died or died after the death of her whole, on the ground that it is possible to bring damages for each share of 30,00 won per share on the ground that it is a new subject, and as a result, calculated damages for the future more than three times or more than those for the new subject as above, it shall be more reasonable to recognize the amount of damages for a larger amount than those for the severe damage than those for the new subject as above, which shall be contrary to the principle of equity and fair.

The second ground of appeal is examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, if the testimony of the witness No. 8 is taken by the witness Non-party 1 and Non-party 2's testimony, the court below acknowledged the fact that the oil takes 360,000 won per square meter per square meter in order to completely restore the geological features to the original original state because the oil was 900 square meters in the orchard owned by the plaintiff 1 and the water supply source owned by the plaintiff 1, the court below recognized the fact that the amount of 360,000 won per square meter was incurred.

However, according to the records of the plaintiffs' assertion, the plaintiff 1's house and material tools were discharged and the plaintiff 1's house and material tools were affixed to the plaintiff 1's orchard, and the plaintiff 1's witness's testimony adopted as evidence of the original judgment that the gasoline fells into the ground of the plaintiff 1's orchard and the above accident occurred, and the gasoline needs a geological recovery cost on the ground of the plaintiff 1's orchard, and even if considering the result of the first instance examination (site and record) of the original judgment, the plaintiff 1's testimony was proved that the plaintiff 1's house and material were turned into the ground of the 1st instance judgment, and the fact that the 1st instance trial (site and record) of the 1st instance court's judgment was proved that the 9th instance court's testimony was clearly found that the 1st instance court's testimony was not made to the plaintiff 20th instance court because the 1st instance court witness's 2nd instance of the gasoline tank's front water of the 19th instance.

그런데 휘발성이 강한 휘발유가 흘러내려 화기에 인화되어 즉각적으로 화재가 발생한 것이라면 비록 일시에 다량의 휘발유가 흘러내렸다 할지라도 타서 없어졌을 것을 쉽게 알아차릴 수 있고 휘발유가 흘러내린 장소와 동 원고의 과수원까지는 상당거리가 있음을 짐작할 수 있는 것임에 비추어(현장사진 참조-기록 114, 115장) 부락민들 가옥 및 그 부근의 넓은 농지를 거쳐 과수원 900평에 이르는 면적의 땅에까지 휘발유가 스며들어 원판시와 같은 다액의 비용이 들지 않고서는 완전히 원상으로 복구할 수 없을 정도로 지질을 해친 사실을 인정하려면 그만큼 많은 분량의 휘발유가 그 부근 일대 지면을 흠뻑 적실정도로 쏟아져 내렸다거나, 즉시 인화되지 않고 땅속까지 스며든 한참 만에 화재가 발생하였다는 등의 사정을 조사해 보지 아니하고서는 할 수 없는 것인데도 불구하고, 이에 이르지 아니하고 지질복구 손해금을 인정한 원판결은 심리미진으로 만연히 기름이 스며들어 지질을 해친 사실을 인정하고, 겸하여 확실한 증거없이 한 채증법칙위배의 잘못 있다 할 것이므로 이점에 관한 논지도 이유있다.

Since the above illegality is affected by the conclusion of the judgment, the part concerning lost profit damages and expenses for the restoration of the water source geological features of Plaintiff 1 among the original judgment shall be reversed and remanded. The remaining appeals shall be dismissed and the costs of appeal concerning this part shall be borne by the defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Kim Young-chul Kim Young-ho (Presiding Judge)