The liability of the corporation and traffic accidents caused during the trial operation as part of the blind maintenance act of the bus mechanic;

In light of the fact that the maintenance of the vehicle involved in this accident does not fall under the original scope of the business of the Defendant Company A, but if the place at which the maintenance is requested is the place where the maintenance hole belonging to the Defendant Company and the Defendant Company has maintained the vehicle of the Defendant Company, and the Defendant Company also has accepted the other vehicle maintenance of the above “A” in its ordinary sense, it can be seen that the maintenance of the vehicle is closely similar to the original business and falls under the scope of its duties to the general public, and thus, the Defendant Company, as the user of the “A,” is liable for compensation for the instant accident caused during the trial operation, which is a part of the maintenance work of the said “A.”

Article 756 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 64Da3 delivered on June 30, 1964 (Supreme Court Decision 8089Da8089 delivered on June 30, 196, Supreme Court Decision 12 ① civil 205 delivered on June 12, 199, Supreme Court Decision 756(37)654

Plaintiff 1 and four others

Civil Transport Corporation

Busan District Court (79Gahap818)

(1) The original judgment is modified as follows.

(2) The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 the amount of 4,135,779 won and the amount of 3,535,484 won, the amount of 2,456,989 won and the amount of 5% per annum from March 25, 1979 to the date of full payment.

(3) The plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed.

(4) The costs of lawsuit shall be divided into three parts through the first and second trials, and one of them shall be borne by the plaintiff and the other by the defendant.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 the amount of KRW 6,144,384 and the plaintiff 2 the amount of KRW 5,544,384, the amount of KRW 3,862,923 and the amount of KRW 3,862,923 and the amount of KRW 5% per annum from March 25, 1979 to the date of full payment, and a provisional execution.

The original judgment shall be revoked.

The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

All the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs in the first and second instances.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

The defendant, a non-party 1, who has been employed by the non-party 1 as a stude for maintenance and repair of the above non-party 1 and had the non-party 2 take charge of the daily inspection and simple maintenance of the taxi belonging to the above company, without dispute between the parties. If the non-party 2's testimony of the court below without dispute and the result of the examination of criminal records of the court below and the whole purport of the pleading are gathered, the non-party 1 shall keep a simple maintenance organization located at the corner of the YY-dong, Busan, Busan, and shall not be allowed to repair the above non-party 1's car at the time of repair and repair of the above non-party 1's 2's own expense because it was difficult for the non-party 1 to confirm the non-party 1's daily inspection and repair of the above non-party 3's stude of the above 1's own car at the time of repair and repair of the above non-party 1's own car at the time of Busan. The above non-party 2 was allowed to repair.

Therefore, the accident in this case occurred in the course of trial operation by the non-party 1, who is requested to maintain the vehicle owned by the co-defendant in the court below as part of the maintenance work. Thus, the maintenance of the vehicle in this case does not include the scope of the original work of the non-party 1 as the defendant company maintenance work. However, if the place at which the maintenance work of the vehicle in this case was requested is the place where the non-party 1, who is authorized to maintain the vehicle of the defendant company, was stationed in the defendant company, and the defendant company allowed the maintenance of the vehicle of the non-party 1 to maintain the vehicle of this case at ordinary level, it can be seen that the above non-party 1 is closely related to the original work and similar to the work of the non-party 1, and the general public falls under the scope of his duties. Accordingly, the defendant is liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the above non-party 1 and the plaintiffs, as seen above, after the accident in this case in the course of trial operation, which is a part of the expression agency under the Civil Act.

On the other hand, if the above criminal record verification was collected from the whole purport of oral argument, the above non-party deceased was cut to a roadway other than the crosswalk, and was used at the point of accident in which the accident occurred, which was followed by the accident, the fact that the vehicle of this case was placed on the vehicle of this case. As such, the negligence of the above deceased, which was recklessly cut to the vehicle of this case, was also concurrent, should be considered in determining the amount of compensation.

2. Scope of damages.

(a) Property damage;

(1) Funeral expenses, etc.

The court below's witness's testimony 6-1 to 6 (each receipt) that is recognized as the authenticity by non-party 6's testimony can be acknowledged that the plaintiff 1, who is his wife, has paid 10,000 won of hospital fees, such as medical expenses for the deceased, body therapy, funeral expenses, and funeral fares, 469,00 won, 92,850 won, 571,850 won, and 571,850 won of accommodation expenses during a funeral period. The above money is recognized as reasonable expenses for the funeral and incidental expenses of the deceased, but when considering the negligence of the deceased above, the defendant is deemed to have paid 70% of the above money to the above plaintiff.

(2) Loss proceeds

Although the above non-party deceased's male on December 27, 1935 can be engaged in the occupation to be seen below his average life period of 55 years of age, there is no dispute between the parties. If the above non-party deceased's statement Gap evidence 4 (career Certificate), Gap evidence 5-1, 2 (Benefits Certificate), and the testimony and arguments of the above witness are gathered, the above non-party deceased can be recognized that he worked as the production worker of the main factory of the Korea Shipbuilding Corporation and received 29,986 won (including bonuses and tax deduction) monthly salary of 130,000 won, 20,000 won for the monthly living expenses of the above deceased's 10,000 won x 10,000 won for the above 20,000 won for the monthly living expenses of the above deceased's 30,000 won x 10,000 won for the above 20,000 won per month for which the above non-party deceased's age of 5 x.

On the other hand, Plaintiff 1’s wife, Plaintiff 2’s heir, Plaintiff 3, Plaintiff 4, and 5, as the head of Nonparty 1, as the head of Nonparty 2, did not have any dispute between the parties as to the facts that they were their children. Thus, the Plaintiffs jointly inherited KRW 12,341,937, the above recognized damage claim amount due to the death of Nonparty 1 and 2, and if they are divided according to their statutory shares, the shares of Plaintiff 1 and 2 shall be KRW 3,085,484, the respective shares of Plaintiff 1 and 2, and the remaining shares of the Plaintiffs shall be KRW 2,056,989, respectively.

(b) consolation money;

Since the above non-party deceased's death as a result of the accident of this case, it is sufficient that the above non-party deceased and his wife suffered a lot of mental pain in light of the empirical rule. Thus, the defendant is obligated to do so. Considering the circumstance of the accident of this case, the above deceased's negligence, the age, status and property status of the above deceased and the plaintiffs, and all other circumstances revealed in the arguments, it is reasonable to determine 600,000 won for the above non-party deceased and 50,000 won for the remaining plaintiffs as consolation money, and 300,000 won for the above non-party deceased and 50,000 won for the plaintiff 1 were jointly inherited by the plaintiffs, and if divided according to the share of the above recognition, the share of the plaintiff 1 and 2 shall be 150,000 won for each part, and the remaining part of the plaintiffs shall be 100,000 won for the plaintiffs.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 1 the amount of 4,135,779 won (40,295 won + 3,085,484 won + 500,000 won + 150,000 won) and 3,535,484 won (3,085,484 won + 300,000 won + 150,000 won) to the plaintiff 2, and 2,456,989 won (2,05,989 + 300,000 won + 100,000 won) and each of the above money to the other, and damages for delay shall be paid at a rate of 5 percent per annum under the Civil Act from March 25, 1979, the next day of the tort of this case, to the extent of the remainder of the plaintiffs' claims. Therefore, this is without merit.

Therefore, since the original judgment is deemed to have partially different conclusions and thus it is unreasonable, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the ground that it is reasonable to revise the original judgment and apply Articles 96, 89, 92, and 93 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to the bearing of litigation costs, and that provisional execution is not attached.

Judges fixed ticket (Presiding Judge) Mobile Engines