Whether the State is liable for damage caused by violence in the course of new illness training.

The school officer or assistant who trained a new illness must take a training assistance necessary to educate a training soldier, using a humanitarian method and shall not engage in an act such as saluting from the slope of 30 degrees such as this case in particular, even though the non-party 3, who is orally corrects the wrong attitude without deep mind, has caused the accident. Thus, the defendant is obliged to compensate for damages caused by the tort committed by the non-party 3 in the course of performing official duties.

Article 2 of the State Compensation Act

Supreme Court Decision 69Da358 delivered on May 27, 1969

Plaintiff

Korea

Seoul Central District Court (67Ga3596) of the first instance court

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of 738,525 won and the amount at the rate of 5 percent per annum from May 29, 1966 to the date of full payment.

The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

The appeal cost shall be divided into eight parts, and seven parts shall be borne by the defendant, and the remainder shall be borne by the plaintiff.

In the above two paragraphs, gold 2.9,00 won and the text of the original judgment may be provisionally executed.

By expanding the purport of the claim at the trial of the court, the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of 1,089,579 won (2.10,000 won in the original trial and the amount of 5% interest per annum from May 29, 1966 to the date of full payment) and the amount of money at the rate of 5% per annum from May 29, 196 to the date of full payment.

The judgment that the litigation costs should be borne by the defendant was sought.

The plaintiff shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 879,579 and the amount at the rate of five percent per annum from May 29, 1966 to the date of full payment.

The judgment that litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant and the pronouncement of provisional execution shall be sought, and the defendant shall revoke the original judgment.

The plaintiff's claim (including the part of the claim for extension in the trial) is dismissed.

The court costs were assessed against all the plaintiff in the first and second instances.

(1) The establishment of tort

The non-party 4's evidence Nos. 4-1, 2-2 (Report on Investigation of Petition Nos. 4-3), Gap evidence Nos. 5-3 (in response to the request for investigation of an accident), and evidence Nos. 7 (in response to the request for investigation of an accident), the non-party 3's testimony of the court below as a result of the appraiser Nos. 1 and the non-party 3's testimony as a result of the examination of the non-party 3's new evidence Nos. 50-2 (the non-party 3's testimony as a result of the examination of the non-party 3's new evidence Nos. 4), which were the non-party 3's new evidence Nos. 1,00-2 (the non-party 4's new evidence No. 1,000-party 3's new evidence No. 1,000-party 3's new evidence No. 1,000-party 4's new evidence No.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to compensate for damages caused by the tort committed by the negligence in the performance of official duties by the non-party 3.

(2) Property damages

In light of Gap evidence Nos. 1 (Simplified Life Table), 3 (Simplified Copy of Family Register), 6 (A), 8-1, 2-3 of the above evidence Nos. 5-3 of the above evidence Nos. 5-3 of the above evidence Nos. 1 and the testimony of non-party No. 1 of the trial witness as a result of the physical appraisal conducted by non-party No. 1 of the above evidence Nos. 1 of the above evidence Nos. 1 of the above evidence Nos. 1 of the above evidence Nos. 1 of the above evidence Nos. 3 (S. 28 years of age and 4 months of age at the time of the accident), and the average remaining life of the plaintiff was 31.47 years of age and was engaged in the agricultural work at the place of residence, and the daily wage No. 1 of the above evidence No. 5 of the above evidence No. 1 of the above evidence No. 1 of the above evidence No. 8 of the above evidence No. 1 of the judgment No. 1 of the court below was found that the average labor of 30 days of the above was lost 5 years of the above. 10. 7.

(A) Loss amount

As such, the Plaintiff lost the annual net income of 66,360 won (316 won x 300 x 00 x 0.7) each year from among the profits that he/she is able to engage in daily work in rural communities over 23 years from the time he/she completed his/her military service, and the Plaintiff claims the annual net income on the basis of the date of the accident. Thus, in calculating the annual interest calculated by deducting the interim interest of 5% per annum from the date of the accident, he/she shall lose the amount of the original, and the amount shall be 878,613 [6,360 won] if he/she calculates the amount of the annual interest calculated by deducting the interim interest of 5% pursuant to the "Nofmanial Calculation Act."

(B) Alley seven payments;

In addition, according to the above facts, the plaintiff claims for the amount of 5% per annum from the date of the accident to the age of 59 that he can survive (the plaintiff's assertion was followed) and the amount of 19,912 won by deducting the interim interest of 5% per annum from the date of the accident.

[5,000 + (1+0.05 x 5) + (1+0.05 x 1+0.05 x 10) +1/ (1 +0.05 x 15) +1/ (1 +0.05 x 20) +1/1/ (20 x 1+0.05 x 25)].

(3) The claim relationship of consolation money

As recognized above, the plaintiff suffered from the injury recognized above due to the above accident, and the plaintiff suffered from the present mental pain and will also sustain it in the future, and therefore, the defendant is obligated to do so. Thus, considering the above Gap evidence No. 3 and the plaintiff's age, academic background, property level, and all other facts of this case which can be seen by the non-party No. 2's testimony, it is recognized that 50,000 won is considerable.

(4) Thus, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of 948,525 won (878,613 won + 19,912 won + 50,000 won) and damages for delay at the rate of 5% per annum from May 29, 1966, the next day of the tort committed by the plaintiff to the date of full payment. Thus, the plaintiff's appeal against the judgment below (as to the court below's appeal which cited the whole amount of 2.10,00 won and damages for delay as claimed in the court below's judgment) is without merit, and the plaintiff's appeal is justified to the extent of citing the amount of 879,579 won extended at the court of appeal, the amount of 738,525 won out of the claim amount of 879,579 won, and damages for delay thereof, to the extent that the plaintiff's

Therefore, the costs of appeal shall be set by the order ratio of the main source and shall be sentenced to a provisional execution within the scope of Paragraph (5) of the Disposition (It is recognized that the machine part does not declare provisional execution by all the circumstances).

It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judge Sick-man (Presiding Judge)