Whether the procedures for deliberation of compensation under the State Compensation Act should be followed in cases where a claim for damages is filed against the State under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act.

When a claim for damages is filed with the State in accordance with the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, the same law takes precedence over the State Compensation Act, so there is no need to go through the procedure of the State Compensation Act.

Article 9 of the State Compensation Act

Kim Tae-il et al.

Korea

Seoul Central District Court (77Gahap904) in the first instance trial

The appeal is dismissed.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff Kim Tae-il 250,00 won with the amount equivalent to 3,036,427 won per annum from the 1976 September 21, 1976 to the 3,036,427 won per annum to Dong Kim Jong-tae, Kim Jong-dong, Kim Jong-soo, Kim Chang-soo, Kim Chang-jo, and Kim Chang-jo, with the amount equivalent to 50,000 won per annum from the 250,000 won to the full payment date.

The judgment that the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant and a provisional execution declaration are declared.

The part against the defendant in the original judgment shall be revoked.

This part of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The court costs are assessed against all plaintiffs in the first and second instances.

1. First of all, the defendant's main defense as the main defense that the plaintiffs did not go through the procedure for the deliberation of compensation under the State Compensation Act. Thus, since this lawsuit is alleged to be unlawful, it is obvious in the record that the plaintiffs are claiming this case under the provisions of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, and the same act does not require the above procedure prior to the State Compensation Act, so the defendant's defense is groundless.

2. The determination of occurrence of liability for damages; and

In full view of the statements in Gap evidence Nos. 4-1 (Lawsuit), 2-2 (Protocol of Indictment), 3-3 (Evidence Report) of the same evidence, and Gap evidence Nos. 2 (Patient Opinion) of the court below witness testimony Nos. 4-1 (Evidence Report), and the testimony in the above witness testimony No. 1-2 (Patient Opinion) of the court below's witness No. 2, the whole purport of the pleading is as follows. The defendant A-202-64's non-party 1/4 tons of the non-party 1/4 of the non-party 1-64 of the non-party 1-2 who was driven by the non-party 1-3 of the military transportation service unit of the military transport service unit of the Army No. 1950, Oct. 8, 1976. The plaintiff was faced with the non-party 1-2 of the defendant Kim Young-ok, who was driven by the non-party 1-party 1's father, and there is no dispute.

Meanwhile, in light of the above evidence Nos. 4-1, 2 and 3, it is recognized that the above plaintiff Kim Young-ok died as the fourth-year student of the national school, and that the above accident occurred to cross the above way during his returning home, and it cannot be viewed that the plaintiff was negligent in the above accident, or that the defendant's liability is exempted due to his negligence. Thus, it is considered in determining the scope of compensation for damages.

3. The scope of compensation for damage shall be examined;

(1) First, the Plaintiff Kim Young-ok’s property damage is health expenses;

In full view of the statements in Gap evidence 1 (No. 1), evidence No. 5 (Agricultural Cooperative Survey Monthly) and evidence No. 6 (Simplified Life Table), and the purport of the oral argument as a result of the appraisal by the appraiser of the original trial, the plaintiff may be recognized as having been employed on November 5, 196 for 9 years and 11 months from the time of the above accident, and the life expectancy remains for 60 years from the time of the above accident and lost approximately 15 percent work ability to work in rural communities due to the aftermath of the above accident, and the fact that the work wage of the adult female in rural communities at the time of the above accident was 1,522 causes per day (the above amount shall be maintained at the time of the closing of oral argument and even after that time in light of the increase in water price), and the fact that adult female can work in rural communities until the time of 55 days each month can be recognized in light of the empirical rule.

Therefore, if the above accident had not occurred, the plaintiff was engaged in the daily work for rural communities from the age of 5 to the age of 36,050 per month, and was able to obtain the monthly income of 36,050 won (within the extent of the above recognized amount, gold 1,478 won per day and the calculation of 25 days as requested by the above plaintiff). The plaintiff was 66,510 won (gold 36,950 won x 15/100) due to the aftermath of the above wife's aftermath of the above wife's ability to work, thereby causing the loss of the party's revenue. Thus, the plaintiff is seeking compensation for damages at the same time. Accordingly, in calculating the current price at the time of the above accident according to the Hofman's calculation method that deducts the interim interest of 5 percent per annum, the amount shall be less than 93,898 won [gold 66,510 won].

Next, in full view of the above witness testimony of No. 3 (written claim) and the whole purport of the oral argument, it is recognized that the plaintiff was hospitalized in the 1,777,360 won as expenses for the hospitalized treatment of the plaintiff who was hospitalized in the 1,77,360 won during the period from October 8, 1976 to March 25, 1977 due to the above accident, and there is no counter-proof. Thus, this amount is also the damage caused by the above accident.

Therefore, the plaintiff's property damage is the total amount of KRW 2,771,258, but when considering the above plaintiff's negligence, it is reasonable to compensate for the defendant's property damage amounting to KRW 2,00,000.

(2) As to the claim for consolation money, the following:

As a result of the above accident, the plaintiffs Kim Young-ok suffered severe mental distress by not only the plaintiff himself but also his father, the plaintiff Kim Jong-il and his father, and the remaining plaintiffs, who are his siblings, are easily recognized in light of the empirical rule. Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay the money and pay it accordingly. Thus, considering the circumstances leading up to the above recognition, degree of damage, the plaintiffs' status status and all other circumstances shown in the plaintiffs' arguments, it is reasonable to pay 150,000 won as consolation money to the plaintiff Kim Young-ok, 10,000 won as consolation money, 50,000 won as well as 50,000 won as to the rest of the plaintiffs.

4. Accordingly, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff Kim Young-ok the above property damage amounting to KRW 2,00,000, consolation money amounting to KRW 150,000, 150, 2,150,000, 2,000, 300 consolation money to Dong Kim Tae-il, and 50,000 consolation money to the rest of the plaintiffs, and 50,000 consolation money to the rest of the plaintiffs, and 50,000 annual interest rate of 5% per annum of Civil Litigation from October 8, 1976 to the full payment date, which is the date of the above accident. Accordingly, each of the plaintiffs' claims is justified within the above recognition scope, and each of the remaining claims shall be dismissed without merit. The defendant's appeal is just, and the defendant's appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendant who is the losing party, and it shall be rejected as per the order of provisional execution pursuant to the proviso of Article 3 (1) of Civil Procedure Act.

Judges Kim Sang-won (Presiding Judge)