2017 Doz. 23152 Compensation for damages

A

Korea

September 7, 2017

September 28, 2017

1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 50 million won with 5% interest per annum from May 10, 2017 to the delivery date of a copy of the complaint of this case, and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

1. Basic facts

A. On November 14, 2015, the Plaintiff was driving on the non-party B’s frighting vehicle and was driving on the non-party B’s frighting vehicle in the agricultural and fishery market located in 95 as Guriri-si, and the occurrence of a traffic accident that conflicts with the non-party D’s Espke vehicle (hereinafter “instant accident”).

B. On July 17, 2016, the Guri Police Station received each motion picture from B and D at the time of the instant accident (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each video of this case”), and appraised whether D’s video operation submitted to the National Institute of Scientific Investigation and Investigation, and whether each video of this case is mutually identical.

C. On August 16, 2016, August 17, 2016, and August 22, 2016, the Guri-gu Police Station sent the following appraisal results with respect to the above appraisal request.

A person shall be appointed.

D. The Plaintiff demanded the Guri Police Station to re-examine whether the video content submitted by D is operated or not and whether each of the images of this case is identical, while demanding the change of the content of the traffic accident confirmation devices from "no damage" to "injury."

E. Accordingly, on March 28, 2017, the Guri Police Station requested the National Scientific Investigation Institute under the Defendant to appraise the possibility of forgery and alteration of the images submitted by D, and the identity of each of the images of this case.

F. On April 5, 2017, the Korea National Science Investigation Institute under the Defendant sent the result of the appraisal to the Guri Police Station as follows.

A. The speed of Ma1 vehicle confirmed in the appraisal material is as shown in the digital analysis that has already responded to the existing digital analysis-663 ( August 17, 2016).B, in the appraisal material, Me1 vehicle is presumed to be located in the parallel lane from the time of the moving of Ma2 vehicle to the parallel lane of the Ma1 vehicle (e.g., picture), and thereafter (e., picture 2) to the right side from the time of the [e.g., omitted] (e., picture 2).

[Reasons for Recognition] Evidence No. 1, Evidence Nos. 1 to 6, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion

The Plaintiff was not paid insurance money by a public official affiliated with the Defendant for the purpose that each of the images of this case was not fabricated. The Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff a total of KRW 500,000,000 (= KRW 60,000,000 for lost income between June of one year + KRW 320,000 for lost income for eight years until the Plaintiff reaches the age of 40 + KRW 120,000 for lost income for eight years until the Plaintiff reaches the age of 40) + KRW 120,000 for consolation money including punitive damages.

3. Judgment on the defendant's main defense

A. Summary of the defendant's main defense

The report of the appraisal request of the National Scientific Investigation Institute is merely a kind of factual act that reports the results of appraisal to the agency requesting appraisal, and the appraisal result is used as reference materials for the agency requesting appraisal, which is not the plaintiff, so it cannot be deemed that any rights and obligations are granted to the plaintiff, or that the change or loss is not effective. Therefore, the lawsuit of this case is unlawful and thus dismissed.

B. Determination

The plaintiff asserts that the public officials belonging to the National Institute of Scientific Investigation under the defendant have caused damages by erroneous appraisal as to the operation of each of the images of this case by intention or negligence, and that the lawsuit of this case was brought, it can be viewed as the assertion of the relationship of property rights, and therefore, there is a benefit

In addition, in a lawsuit for performance, the standing to be a party lies in a person who asserts that he/she has the right to demand performance, which is a subject matter of lawsuit, and whether the right to demand performance exists is to be proved through the deliberation of the merits (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2003Da44387, 44394, Oct. 7, 2005). The existence of the right to claim compensation for damages asserted by the

Therefore, the defendant's above main defense cannot be accepted.

4. Judgment on the merits

Even based on all evidence presented in the argument of this case, such as the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff, it is difficult to view that a public official belonging to the National Institute of Scientific Investigation under the Defendant has made a wrong appraisal of whether the video of this case was operated intentionally or by negligence, or that the damage was inflicted on the Plaintiff. There is no other evidence

5. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

The presiding judge, Gimyang-ho

판사임샛별

Judges Go-man