A. In a claim for damages due to an automobile accident, whether the claim for damages under the Civil Act is a claim for damages

(b) The case holding that a proximate causal relationship is recognized with the act of parking a vehicle on the street without extracting the height of the vehicle and the accident caused by a third party who stolen the vehicle;

A. The Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall take precedence over the Civil Act in a claim for damages caused by an automobile accident, but it cannot be said that the victim cannot file a claim for damages under the Civil Act.

B. In a case where Party B, the husband of Party B, who is the owner of a sealed studco, was driving the said vehicle on the day of the accident while managing and operating the said vehicle, and parked the said vehicle on the street prior to the beauty room of Party A’s management while locking it at the beauty room, and the entrance is set up at a 10 minutes and the entrance is set up, and if Party C, at his own discretion, arbitrarily enters the said vehicle and walked the engine operation while driving the vehicle and caused a traffic accident while driving the said vehicle while driving the vehicle, there is a proximate causal relation between Party B’s act of parking the vehicle on the street without cutting the height of the vehicle and the damage caused by the occurrence of the accident by Party C, a third party who stolen the said vehicle.

(a)Article 750(a) of the Civil Code, Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act;

Plaintiff 1 and four others

Defendant Kim Jong-sik et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 86Na1861 delivered on October 30, 1986

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

The Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act should take precedence over the civil law in a claim for damages caused by an automobile accident, but it can not be said that the victim cannot make a claim for damages under the civil law.

Therefore, on the premise that the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act should be applied first, the lower court’s position that recognized tort liability under the Civil Act is erroneous in misapprehending the legal doctrine on the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act cannot be accepted.

In addition, as determined by the court below, the defendant is the owner of a enclosed kinco, and the co-defendant 2 of the court below, who is the husband of the above vehicle and operated the above vehicle of Pyeongtaek on January 31, 1985, he parked the above vehicle on the street in front of the 'ice Yari' 23:10 of the same day, which is located in the north-gu Incheon Metropolitan City, Incheon Metropolitan City, in the beauty art room, and can be seen as locked to the above beauty art room, and the entrance gate is not fastened and the non-party's name is 10 minutes away from the entrance gate, and the non-party's name is driving the vehicle at the engine stop and driving on the above vehicle at around 0:40 of Feb. 20, 1985, and if the non-party's name was not the victim of the above vehicle, the judgment below did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principle as seen above and did not cause the damage to the motor vehicle of this case.

All of the arguments are without merit, 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 Lee Jin-hun (Presiding Justice)