A. Whether the State or a local government can be held liable under the State Compensation Act in a case where a public official’s act is not related to his/her original duty and cannot be seen as an act within his/her scope of duty in appearance (negative)

B. Whether an act within the external range of duty can be deemed as an act where a public official Gap, who belongs to the tax office of the Gu and the public official Gap, purchased or sold an unauthorized building tenant's occupancy right to the tenant Eul (negative), and whether proximate causal relation exists between Gap's act and Eul's damage in a case where Gap, who was appointed as a housing improvement place and thereafter confirmed the person entitled to occupancy right to Eul by using a false receipt ledger kept (negative)

A. The tort committed by a public official by the State or a local government against whom the State or a local government is responsible for damages caused by a public official’s intentional tort should be committed in the course of performing his duties. If a public official’s act is not related to his original duties and cannot be seen as an act within the scope of his duties even in appearance, the State or a local government’s liability under the State Compensation Act for damages

B. A public official of the Gu office, in collusion with his wife, etc. before he was appointed as a housing improvement center, in selling and selling the Si apartment house occupancy right to the non-authorized building demolition tenants, this is merely an act committed by the Party A, and it does not constitute an act within the scope of his original duties, such as imposition and collection of local taxes performed by the tax department at the time, and cannot be seen as an act within the scope of duties in appearance, and it cannot be seen as an act committed by the Party A, even if the tenant was found to have been falsely verified and kept in the housing improvement center office by taking advantage of the occupancy application form and the ledger for receipt of change of name, which is the legitimate person entitled to the right to move in, and received the application form for change of name, and confirmed that the name of the tenant was legally changed, even if it was merely a crime committed after the termination of the illegal act, and thus, it is difficult to find a proximate causal relationship between the damage and the ex post facto criminal negligence.

(b)Article 2(c) of the State Compensation Act; Article 750 of the Civil Code

A. (B) Supreme Court Decision 92Da6952 delivered on January 15, 1993 (Dong Dong-dong), 92Da11732 delivered on January 15, 1993 (Gong198, 676). Supreme Court Decision 87Meu163 delivered on March 22, 198 (Gong198, 676) 90Meu27648 delivered on December 11, 1990 (Gong191, 475)

electric power lines

Attorney Cho Jong-woo, et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 91Na43468 delivered on January 28, 1992

The part of the judgment of the court below regarding the Selection's literature rules and the counter shall be reversed, and the case shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The defendants' remaining appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal dismissed shall be assessed against the defendants.

As to the Defendant’s ground of appeal

According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, the court below held that the non-party 1 and the non-party 2 were responsible for the above non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 2's work of purchasing and selling the above apartment house, and the non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 3's non-party 4, 6, 7 and 8's non-party 8's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party.

The judgment of the court below and the fact-finding in relation to the plaintiff and the remaining designated parties except for the literature rules and the counter are just and there is no error of law that affected the conclusion of the judgment due to the misapprehension of legal principles as to the scope of application of delegated affairs and the State Compensation Act, such as the theory of lawsuit, or mistake of facts due to the violation

However, after reviewing the Appointers' literature rules and the part of the counter, the above Appointors were examined, and at the time Nonparty 1 served in the same tax 1, which was prior to the appointment of Nonparty 1 as the Defendant’s old housing and the housing improvement center on January 27, 1989, they were affiliated with Nonparty 1, etc. and entered into a contract for the occupancy of the Si-young apartment under the name of the revenues from the removal of the building without permission in this case and paid the price (see, e.g., evidence 1-20, 69

In order for the state or local government to bear liability for damages caused by the intentional tort by the public official under its jurisdiction, the illegal act of the public official must be committed in the course of performing his duties. If the public official's act is not related to his original duties and cannot be seen as an act within his scope of duties, it cannot be recognized that the public official's act constitutes an act within his scope of duties under the State Compensation Act.

Thus, even if Nonparty 1 acted in collusion with Nonparty 3, who was his wife before he was appointed as the head of the old housing and the housing improvement center, it is merely an act committed by Nonparty 1 by himself, and it cannot be seen as an act within the scope of his original duties, such as imposition and collection of local tax performed by Defendant 1 at the time, which was performed by Nonparty 1, and it cannot be seen as an act within the scope of his original duties. Nonparty 1 was appointed as the head of the housing improvement center, and Nonparty 1 later was appointed as the head of the housing improvement center, and the tenant was found to have been falsely prepared and kept in the office of the defendant's old housing improvement center by using the ledger of acceptance of change of name, or confirmed that the name of the tenant was changed lawfully by accepting the application for change of name, and thus, it is difficult to recognize the legal principle of proximate causal relation between the plaintiff and the selected tenant after the termination of the illegal act, and thus, it is difficult to recognize the defendant's liability for damages and losses.

In addition, the defendants' assertion that the evaluation of the negligence ratio of the court below is erroneous in relation to the plaintiff and the remaining designated parties except the Selection's literature rules and the counter is not acceptable as it has no reason.

For the above reasons, the part of the judgment of the court below regarding the Appointers' literature rules and the counter is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial. The defendants' grounds of appeal are without merit, and all of them are dismissed, and the costs of appeal for this part are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the