A person liable for damage in case of an accident caused by a repairer while driving a motor vehicle left for repair.

The entrustment of the repair of a motor vehicle to a motor vehicle repair business operator for all activities related to the repair of a motor vehicle is included in the act of driving within the limit necessary for the repair or the trial operation. Thus, the right to control the operation of a motor vehicle during the repair period is against the repairer, and the accident caused by an employee while driving a motor vehicle entrusted for the repair shall be liable to compensate for the damage caused by the repairer, unless there are special circumstances to the contrary.

Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act

west-Sack et al.

Lee Dong-young, Attorney Lee Dong-ho, Counsel for defendant

Seoul High Court Decision 87Na891 delivered on June 11, 1987

The judgment below is reversed and the case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

As to the Defendant’s Attorney’s ground of appeal:

The court below held on August 29, 1986 that the defendant 250 cc from the date of her use to move off 150 cc from her own south, and requested repair to Dong Indonesba operated by Donesba (original co-defendant) with abnormal noise in the engine on August 29, 1986. The non-party 1, who is an employee of Oralba, requested repair from the above Oralbabababababababbab, and confirmed whether the above Oralbaba performed simple inspection of the function of Oralbabababab and adjusted the engine speed to slurbababababbababa, and caused the plaintiffs to die on the way to move back to 30 meters from the engine, and therefore, the defendant was responsible for the accident during the repair process, which is a part of the repair process, and therefore, the defendant should not be deemed to have completed the repair process and completed the repair process.

As a substitute, entrusting the repair of a motor vehicle to a motor vehicle repairer for all activities related to the repair of a motor vehicle and this includes the act of driving within the limits necessary for the repair or the trial operation. Accordingly, the right to control the operation of a motor vehicle during the repair period is for the repairer, and if the accident occurred while an employee is driving a motor vehicle entrusted for repair, the repairer shall be liable for damages as a person who operates the motor vehicle for himself/herself under Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, unless there are special circumstances.

Whether there is a long time to repair a motor vehicle, without compensation, or whether it is waiting for the operator while repairing the motor vehicle, or whether it is necessary to repair the motor vehicle, can not affect the above situation.

Nevertheless, the court below's finding that the defendant requested the acceptance of the accident liability of this case constitutes an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act and failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, and it constitutes Article 12 (2) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings. The arguments are reasonable.

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon In-bok (Presiding Justice)