The case that has been found to be erroneous in the incomplete hearing due to the non-exercise of the right to ask for name;

Although there is a clear evidence that the civilian was aware of the fact that the victim was aboard the military vehicle, it is the incomplete hearing due to the non-exercise of the right to request the driver to prove the authenticity of the fact or documentary evidence, and it is recognized that the driver was unaware of the fact.

Article 126(1) of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff 1 and one other

Republic of Korea, China, and China

Seoul High Court Decision 67Na1734 delivered on February 9, 1968, Seoul High Court Decision 67Na1734 delivered on February 9, 1968

We reverse the original judgment.

The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.

Judgment on the first ground for appeal by the Plaintiff et al.

In full view of the testimony of Non-Party 1, the court below found that Non-Party 1, who was on duty as a military engineer transport unit Nos. 3, 4, 8, 9, and Non-Party 1, who had been on duty as a driver of the first class 50 tons of a combined transport unit of the military engineer transport unit Nos. 1/4, and Non-Party 1, who was on duty, was on duty for Non-Party 2, etc. 200 a., and was on duty at the air school located in Sacheon-gun, Nam-gun, Seoul, around Nov. 19, 1965 and completed his duty at around 5 p.m., Non-Party 1, the court below found Non-Party 4 to have been on duty for Non-Party 5 to have known the fact that Non-Party 5, who had been on duty for Non-Party 1, the defendant was on duty to have been on duty for Non-Party 5 to have been on duty for the above witness.

The ground of appeal No. 2 is examined.

According to the testimony of the court below's decision, the structure of the accident vehicle (profed vehicle) is favorable to the rear side of the vehicle and the rear side of the vehicle. The rear side of the vehicle can have access by people, the inner structure of the vehicle can be loaded on the floor by the floor. The rear side of the vehicle is unrepaird without repair one month prior to the accident, and it is hard for the victim to sleep out with the outer locked relation. However, according to the facts of the accident, it is hard for the latter side of the vehicle to open the rear side of the vehicle without any error, but there was no contradiction between the latter and the vehicle, so it is hard for the victim to open the rear side of the vehicle at the time of the death of the plaintiff. According to the fact that the latter side of the vehicle without any fault, it is hard for the victim to open the front side of the vehicle and to open the rear side of the vehicle, and there was no evidence that the victim died from the front side of the vehicle at the time of the death of the plaintiff.

We reverse the original judgment. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

[Judgment of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Na-dong, Ka-dong, and Lee Jong-young