206Na73593 Compensation (as stated)

1. 00

Chungcheongnam-Nam Hong-gun

2. 00

3. 00

Plaintiff 2, 3’s address Suwon-si

4. 00

Seoul Nowon-gu

5. 00

Seoul Central Central Government

6. 00

Sung-nam City Subdivision-gu

7. 00

Boan City

8. 00

Cheongju-si Song-gu

9.00

Cheongju-si Soak-gu

10.00

Seoul Shiro-gu

11.00

Daejeon Dong-gu

12. 00

Pyeongtaek-si Authenticity

13. 00

Seoul Central Central Government

14. 00

Seoul Jongno-gu

15.Lawsuits of the deceased 000

(a) 00

(b) 00;

Plaintiff 15-A. b. Simsan-si, Simsan-si

16. 00

Chungcheongnam-Nam-gun

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff Law Firm

Attorney Lee In-bok

Korea

Legal representative Kim Sung-ho

Litigation Performers;

Seoul Central District Court Decision 99Da62864 delivered on May 28, 2002

Seoul High Court Decision 2002Na 35630 Delivered on November 20, 2003

Supreme Court Decision 2004Da759 Delivered on July 28, 2006

February 23, 2007

April 6, 2007

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

A. The Defendant: KRW 5,00, KRW 00, and KRW 00, respectively, for Plaintiffs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16

J. 3,00, 000 won, 4,000 won, 8 to Plaintiff 8, 15-A, 1,500 won, 1,500 won, 000 won, 1, 500 won, 1, 500 won, 00 won, 8

and among the above money, 3,00, 00 won, 00 won, and 2 others as to Plaintiff 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, and 16 respectively.

- As to 1,00, 000, 4, 9, 10, 12, and 14 respectively, 2,000, 000, 000, and 8 others

From July 24, 1999, 500 won, 15-A, 250 won, and 00 won, respectively.

Until May 31, 2003, 5% per annum and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

With respect to money, Plaintiffs 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, and 16 respectively, 2,00,000, 000 won, and Plaintiff 2

4 With respect to 3,00,000, 9, 10, 12, and 14 respectively, 1,000, 000, 000, and 1,000, 000 against Plaintiff 4

The plaintiff 1, 250, 00 won 3, 500, 000 won for plaintiff 8, 15-A, 1, 250, 000 won for plaintiff 1, 250

5% per annum from July 24, 1999 to April 6, 2007, and from the next day to the day of full payment.

20% each payment of 20% interest.

B. All of the plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed.

2. 85% of the total costs of litigation shall be borne by the plaintiffs, and 15% by the defendant.

3. Paragraph 1-A(a) may be provisionally executed.

1. Purport of claim

The defendant 40,00,00 won for the plaintiff 1, 10,000 won for the plaintiff 2, 10,000,000 won for the plaintiff 3, 35,000,000 for the plaintiff 3

Won, Plaintiff 4, KRW 25,00, KRW 00, KRW 40, KRW 00, KRW 00, KRW 45,00, KRW 40, KRW 60, KRW 00, KRW 00, and KRW 00, respectively, to Plaintiff 6

J 7 35,00,000 won, Plaintiff 8 5,000,00 won, Plaintiff 9 25,000,000 won, Plaintiff 25,000,000 won, and Plaintiff 10

Moreover, KRW 20,00, KRW 000, Plaintiff 11, KRW 35,00, KRW 00, KRW 000, Plaintiff 12, KRW 30,000, KRW 00, and Plaintiff 13

45,00,000 won, 10,000 won, 14 to Plaintiffs 14, and 2,50, 000 won, 15-A, 2, 500, 000 won, 2, 500 won, and 00 won for Plaintiffs 15-B, respectively,

16 With respect to 50,00,000 won and each of the above amounts, full payment shall be made from the day following the delivery of each complaint of this case.

By the day, 25% interest per annum is paid.

2. Purport of appeal

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke 37,00,000 to the plaintiff 1.

Won, Plaintiff 2, KRW 9,00, KRW 00, KRW 32,00, KRW 000 to Plaintiff 3, and KRW 23,00, KRW 00 to Plaintiff 4, and KRW 23,00,00 to Plaintiff 4, and Plaintiff

5 37,00,000 won, 42,00, 000 won to Plaintiff 6, 32,000 won to Plaintiff 7, 32,000, 000 won to Plaintiff 7, and 8

4, 500, 000 won, 23, 000, 000 won, 18, 000 won, 10, 100 won, and 11 for Plaintiff 11

32, 00, 000 won, 28, 000 won, 12 to Plaintiffs 12, 42, 000 won, 42, 000, 000 won, 13 to Plaintiffs 13, and 14

8. 8,00,000, 15-A, 2,250, 000 won for plaintiffs 15-B, 2,250, 000 won for plaintiffs 16, 47,000, 000 won for plaintiffs 16, and the above

The rate of 25% per annum from the day following the delivery of each complaint of this case to the day of full payment with respect to each money.

each one shall pay the same money.

Defendant: Revocation of the part against Defendant in the judgment of the first instance, and the Plaintiffs corresponding to the revoked part.

All claims are dismissed.

1. Objects to be adjudicated by this Court;

The judgment of the court of first instance prior to the remanding of the case shall be the judgment of the court of first instance which partially accepted the claims of the plaintiffs and six joint plaintiffs.

B. The plaintiffs and the joint plaintiffs of the first instance court dismissed all their claims, and the plaintiffs as to them.

As to the appeal by the co-Plaintiffs of the first instance court, the Supreme Court appeals by the co-Plaintiffs of the first instance court.

Each of the plaintiffs' appeals are accepted only for the part against which the plaintiffs lost, and the judgment of the party before remanding.

Since it was reversed and remanded to this court, the claim against the defendant by the joint plaintiffs in the first instance trial.

Sector was determined separately by the above Supreme Court's judgment on partial reversal and transmission. Accordingly, this Court has become final and conclusive.

The subject of the judgment is limited to the claim against the defendant of the plaintiffs, i.e., the part of the reversal and return.

2. Basic facts

Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-4, 39, Gap evidence 3-3, 6 through 9, 10, 14 through 25, 29,

30, 31, 36, 37, 46, 54, 55, 56, 60, 61, Gap evidence 15-1 through 6, Gap evidence 16, and Eul evidence 16.

17-2, 3, 12, 17, 18, 20, 21, 25, 29, 32, 33, and 34 of the evidence of 17-2, 3, 12, 17, 18, 20, 21, 25, 29, 32, and 34

In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, the following facts shall be taken into account with respect to each part of the testimony of Lee Jong-man

may be recognized.

A. The theory of rehabilitation facilities for persons with visual or speech disabilities (hereinafter referred to as the "astronomical or speech disability")

corporation established for the purpose of the operation, etc. of dental, operating and guidance facilities for vagabonds, and under its control;

A sanatorium for mentally disabled persons, a sanatorium for mentally disabled persons, a sanatorium for mentally disabled persons, and a guidance facility for mentally disabled persons;

The two villages were established, and the non-party 1 is the representative director of the astronomical Institute, the non-party 2 is the president of the Song-won, and the non-party.

3 as the president of both villages, the above facilities were jointly operated.

B. Plaintiffs and network 000 (hereinafter “Plaintiffs et al.”) excluding Plaintiff 15-A and B

The plaintiff 1 and the plaintiff 2 from October 19, 1990 to July 21, 1998, and the plaintiff 2

From October 26, 1996 to July 16, 1998; Plaintiff 3, from August 28, 1991 to July 16, 1998; Plaintiff 1, from July 28, 1991 to July 16, 1998;

4 From June 29, 1993 to December 12, 1997; and from April 17, 1990 to July 20, 1998, Plaintiff 5:

Plaintiff 6 from June 10, 1989 to July 16, 1998; Plaintiff 7 from December 5, 1990 to July 16, 1998; and Plaintiff 7 from July 16, 1998

up to the day, Plaintiff 8 from April 14, 1997 to June 24, 1998; Plaintiff 9 from July 13, 1993 to 198

7. From April 1, 1994 to July 16, 1998, Plaintiff 11 to October 5, 1993, while Plaintiff 11 to October 5, 1993

By September 27, 1998, Plaintiff 12, from September 1, 1992 to July 16, 1998, and Plaintiff 13 on December 2, 198, respectively.

From July 16, 1998 to July 16, 1998; Plaintiff 14 to October 4, 1996 to July 23, 1998; the network0 to 1996

12. From July 1, 1997 to February 1, 1997, from February 3, 1997 to August 28, 1997; and Plaintiff 16 to 1989.

4. From 17. to 16. 1998, each expropriation was made.

C. The net00 died on August 4, 1999 and succeeded to Plaintiff 15-A, and B’s property.

D. The head of the Gun, who is a public official in the social welfare division of the Gun office, shall have four non-party who is a public official of the Gun office.

7. 1. Guidance and supervision over the astronomical gardens and their affiliated facilities from January to the time of discharge by the plaintiff, etc.

The person in charge has taken charge.

3. Judgment on the plaintiffs' assertion

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

The Plaintiffs, the Plaintiffs, and the sanatoriums for mentally ill persons, who are the main facilities leading to the vagabonds.

Detainment into the Republic of Korea without legitimate procedures, resulting in forced labor, refusing to enforce the forced labor;

In the case of pursuant to expropriation of the Act, human recommendations, such as assault, or medication of psychotropic stability, etc., are made;

In this case, police officers and public officials are directly and indirectly engaged in the process of accepting the plaintiff et al. to the above facilities.

On the other hand, the Nonparty 1 and 3, et al. silented or defended the illegal kidnapping and detention, and directed the above facilities.

The actual state of the plaintiff et al. who were forced to be detained in the above facility by the non-party 4 who is a public official responsible for supervision

The reason was that a bribe was received in return for the reduction of snow, and the plaintiff et al. left alone at the site of human solicitation.

Since the defendant is an accident, the defendant suffered damages due to a public official's unlawful act.

claim that damages must be paid to the Corporation.

(b) Whether a public official of the Yeongi-Gun Office has performed his duties as the State public official;

Judgment

(1) whether the head of the local government constitutes the delegated affairs of the agency.

in the determination of the court, the form and purpose of the provision of the laws and regulations shall be considered first.

In addition, whether the nature of the affairs is required to be dealt with in a uniform manner across the nation.

shall also be determined by taking into account the burden of expenses, the subject of final liability, etc.

must be the case.

(2) According to the facts described above, the plaintiff et al. is a facility for guiding vagabonds under the jurisdiction of the astronomical Institute.

On December 198, 198, a sanatorium for mentally ill persons began to be admitted for the first time on December 198, 198.

At all times, the discharge was made.

In addition, the period from around December 198 to September 1998 (the number of each plaintiff during the above period)

Although the duration of employment is different, the guidance for vagabonds is made at the time of "the confinement period of the plaintiff et al." for convenience.

Each Gu Social Welfare Services Act shall apply to the guidance and supervision of facilities or sanatoriums for mentally ill persons.

Before the amendment by Law No. 4531 of December 8, 1992, and Act No. 5358 of August 22, 1997

was amended by Act No. 5358 of Aug. 22, 1997). Social Welfare Services Act (wholly amended by Act No. 5358 of Aug. 22, 1997)

(2) The Ministry of Health and Welfare’s directives No. 106 was repealed on August 1, 2000.

(A) Each Gu Mental Health Act (amended by Act No. 5486 of Dec. 31, 1997, and 2000)

1. 12. The former Mental Health Act, the Enforcement Rule of the former Mental Health Act (amended by Act No. 6152, Jun. 13, 1998)

Matters concerning the standards for establishment, operation, etc. of the former mental health sanatorium, before the amendment by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 66

Rule (amended by Ordinance of the Ministry of Health and Welfare No. 168 of August 10, 200), Chungcheongnam-do Rules on Delegation of Administrative Affairs

(amended by Cheongnam-do Rule 2755 of February 20, 1999) was applied or applied mutatis mutandis, the above provision was applicable or applied mutatis mutandis.

According to the relevant provisions of each law, guidance for guidance facilities for vagabonds and sanatoriums for mentally ill persons;

The supervisory authority shall be the Minister of Health and Welfare or the Minister of Health and Welfare (hereinafter referred to as the "Minister") and City/Do.

It is known that it is granted to the head of the Si/Gun/Gu with respect to his/her duties.

ad) as to the facilities and sanatoriums for mentally ill persons granted by the above laws.

We examine whether the Minister’s guidance and supervision authority was entrusted to the head of the Si/Gun/Gu.

section 30.

First, with respect to the form and intent of the relevant laws and regulations, including the above directives,

The above Gu ditches applied to guidance facilities for vagabonds in force from May 4, 1987 to August 1, 2000.

Article 30 (1) of the Regulations on the Operation of Leading Facilities "The Si/Gun/Gu shall be made once a quarter for each Si/Gun/Gu, and the Si/Do shall be made every half year for each quarter.

At least once, a facility shall be provided with guidance and supervision on a regular basis pursuant to social welfare statutes, etc.

(1) The mentally ill person shall be deemed to have been in effect on June 12, 1998 and shall be deemed to have been in force on March 1, 1997.

Article 32 (1) of the Enforcement Rule of the Mental Health Act applied to both facilities shall be referred to as the "Mayor/Gun/Gu office"

The head of the Gu shall, under his/her jurisdiction at least once a quarter, provide medical care facilities for mentally ill persons within his/her jurisdiction;

shall conduct an inspection as to whether the provisions of this Decree and these Rules have been violated. "The provisions of this Ordinance provide for the following:

Each of the above provisions shall have jurisdiction over the business of the head of Si/Gun/Gu with respect to the guidance facilities for ditches.

agency delegation as well as detailed guidelines for the exercise of guidance and supervisory authority;

in accordance with the provisions of Article 93 of the Local Autonomy Act, a anti-founded provision

It appears that the Do/Supervisory Authority is delegated to the head of the Si/Gun/Gu, and it is in the sanatorium for mentally ill persons.

The operation of sanatoriums for mentally ill persons before the enforcement rules of the former Mental Health Act applied thereto are enforced.

§ 29 of the Regulations (Articles 186 to 187, 205 to 208, etc.) provides for the care facilities for mentally ill persons

section 11(b) provides that the Minister’s guidance and supervision authority shall be delegated to the head of the Si/Gun/Gu.

and after the enforcement period of the above Enforcement Rule has expired, the above Gu mental health sanatorium.

Article 9(1) of the Rules on Standards for Establishment and Operation, etc., and Article 2 of the above Rules on Delegation of Administrative Affairs for Chungcheongnam-do

The Minister's authority to guide and supervise sanatoriumss for mentally ill persons shall be delegated to the Mayor/Do Governor, and the agency for loyalty.

It is clear in accordance with the form and intent of the provision that the head of the Si/Gun within the jurisdiction of South-do re-election.

Next, as regards the nature of the affairs, the time of medical treatment for guidance facilities for vagabonds and mentally ill persons

Affairs of guidance and supervision on the establishment and operation of social welfare facilities shall be part of the establishment, operation and management of social welfare facilities.

autonomous affairs of the local government because they fall under the affairs concerning the promotion of the welfare of the local government

In addition, the confinement process or discharge of those who are accommodated in each of the above facilities and the living period under confinement.

prevention of any violation of human rights that may occur between them and financial support for each of the above facilities;

of the local government, such as having the local government receive equal treatment, regardless of the financial capacity of the local government

Since there is a need to deal with the affairs in accordance with the work standards, there is also the nature of the state affairs.

In addition, as regards the bearing of expenses, the State's facilities and medical care for mentally ill persons;

Recognition of the circumstances in which expenses for guidance and supervision of facilities were paid to the local government;

(1) The State or local autonomous body, in accordance with the relevant provisions of each Act mentioned above, shall not have any evidence to

A body shall grant a subsidy to a social welfare foundation or a sanatorium for mentally ill persons to the founder and operator thereof.

and, in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings, evidence No. 3-4, 54, and 56 of the evidence No. 3-5

the facility operation expenses (the personnel expenses, facility management expenses, etc.), living expenses (the cost of food, clothing and shelter), and the cost of performing functions reinforcement (the cost of facilities)

A subsidy under each of the above Acts and subordinate statutes was granted for construction costs, etc., and among them, the cost of operating the facilities

80 per cent of the National Treasury and 20 per cent of the local expenditure ( Chungcheongnam-do) may be found to have been constituted.

Finally, in relation to the ultimate subject of responsibility, the above-mentioned facilities of the French line.

Article 30(2) of the Operational Rule, Article 32(2) of the Enforcement Rule of the Mental Health Act at the time of the enactment, and the above Gu

The provisions of Article 9 (2), etc. of the Rules on the Standards for Establishment, Operation, etc. of Mental Health sanatoriums shall be the City/Do by the Minister

A regular report on the guidance, supervision, or inspection of sanatoriums for mentally ill persons through a physician;

the Secretary shall be the subject of final guidance and supervision. This shall be the subject of whom the Secretary shall be responsible.

I seem to be.

For example, the guidance and supervision of guidance facilities for vagabonds and sanatoriums for mentally ill persons;

The form and purpose of the provision of a statute shall be the Mayor/Gun with the authority of the Minister to guide and supervise each of the above facilities.

that it appears to be delegated or re-entrusted to the head of the Gu, and that it is for each of the above facilities.

The nature of the Do and the supervisory affairs is required to be dealt with in a uniform manner across the country, and each facility above.

the state bears most of the subsidies, such as facility operation costs, and the Ministers regularly

shall be deemed to have been ultimately responsible by filing a report; and

The Minister's authority to guide and supervise each of the above facilities during the period of confinement of the plaintiff, etc. shall be the Mayor/Gun.

It would have been delegated to the head of the Gu.

(3) Accordingly, the head of Si/Gun shall appoint the non-party 4, who is a public official of the Si/Gun during the period of accommodation of the plaintiff

Through this, exercising the right of guidance and supervision for both villages and pasulars shall be the facilities for guidance and supervision; and

The head of the Gun shall exercise his/her authority to provide guidance and supervision on his/her duties.

(1) In addition, the Minister’s authority to guide and supervise the Minister’s authority is delegated to the agency.

I think it also constitutes the exercise of one another.

(c) Occurrence of liability for damages;

(1) As seen earlier, the Minister’s guidance and supervisory authority under the provisions of the relevant laws and regulations

The authority and duty of guidance and supervision of the head of the Si/Gun/Gu who has been appointed shall be at least incidental to the details thereof.

be established to protect safety and interests, such as the body and health of individuals of social members.

As such, it is responsible for the guidance and supervision of guidance facilities for vagabonds and sanatoriums for mentally ill persons.

a public official who fails to fulfill his/her duty of guidance and supervision, thereby failing to fulfill his/her duty;

It shall be determined that it has lost objective legitimacy when it is based on the standards for public officials who have lost the general public;

In the case of the Do, it shall be deemed that the person satisfies the illegal requirements under Article 2 of the State Compensation Act.

the duties of the Mayor, the head of the Gun/Gu, and the duties of the guidance facilities for vagabonds and sanatoriums for mentally ill persons;

Guidance and supervision on the facilities, and where necessary, concerning the details of the business of the facilities;

The report, the submission of related documents, or the submission of related documents, or the public officials under his jurisdiction enter the facilities

the head of the Si/Gun/Gu at his/her discretion, such as that such inspection or question may be conducted;

If such authority is granted to the head of the Si/Gun/Gu even if such authority is granted;

In light of the purport and purpose of this section, the head of the Si/Gun/Gu shall have the authority according to specific circumstances.

of this section by exercising such action as is deemed to be remarkably unreasonable.

Such non-exercise of authority is illegal because it violates the duty of duty.

The appeal is to be made (Supreme Court Decision 99Da64278 delivered on March 9, 2001, Supreme Court Decision 2004 delivered on December 9, 2004

42784 see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 42784).

(2) In this case, Gap evidence 3-3, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 29, 29,

61. Evidence No. 16, Evidence No. 17-2, 3, 12, 17, 18, 20, 21, 25, 29, 32, 33, 34 (the above documentary evidence)

Each of the statements or statements made on the basis of the statements of the plaintiff et al.

According to the records, the plaintiff et al. was treated unfairly as shown in the attached Form.

In fact, even though the police and public officials are recognized, they accept the plaintiff et al. in the above facilities.

in the course of illegal kidnapping and confinement, any certificate that is found to have been silentd or frighted in the course of such unlawful abduction and confinement;

there is no ocs.

Meanwhile, according to the statements in Gap evidence No. 3-16, 39, 55, and 61, the net00 is February 2, 1997.

1. When one’s sentence was found to be both villages and was discharged from the center on the ground that the relative was the relative, February 1997.

3. The non-party 4 who is a public official in charge of the social welfare division in the Yeongi-Gun Office is found in his village in his country.

Recognizing that a person was unlawfully detained and was subject to forced labor and assault, the person demanded compensation; however, the person demanded compensation;

The non-party 4 is entitled to receive compensation for damages. " or to take corrective action". The non-party 4 refers to 000

B Return, and the network 000 on the same day was left by the Gun office, and the grandchildren, etc. who are members of both villages.

It can be recognized that he/she has re-claimed the two villages by violence.

However, before February 3, 1997, the non-party 4 et al. as shown in the separate sheet

There is no sufficient evidence to acknowledge that a person was neglected even though he/she was aware that he/she received treatment;

J. (No. 1, No. 2-39 of the Evidence No. 39)

In addition, on June 27, 1999, 300,000 won in cash from Nonparty 5, and 2,000 others in relation to his duties

ter 720,00 won per head of the household on July 7, 1996, equivalent to 720,000 won per head of the household on September 4, 1997, 500,000 won per head of the household on September 4, 1997

It can be recognized that the bribe is received, but the amount of the bribe, the time and circumstances of the receipt, etc.

(2) an unlawful act, such as assault, confinement, etc., of the persons involved in the astronomical source; or

(1) The non-party 4 shall not be deemed to have received the same as the price. Furthermore, the non-party 4 shall be deemed to have received the same as the price

When the standard is for a general public official during the coming from the exercise of guidance and supervision over the Board.

Non-party 1, etc. who violated his/her duty to the extent that he/she has lost objective legitimacy.

It is difficult to readily conclude that the Plaintiff et al. was unable to detect or detect illegal cryp and confinement.

It is difficult to do so.

However, as seen earlier, the net 000 verbally filed against the Nonparty 4 on February 3, 1997

In light of the contents set forth, at least the two villages, which are social welfare facilities under the same social welfare foundation.

Not only the 000 public officials in charge of the guidance and supervision of the Songwon, etc., but also the Doese 000

Along with those confined in Yang-si Village and Song-won, etc., there have been a similar work, and this has also been done.

(1) The extent to which the same day as the vehicle may arise if the vehicle is left alone may be easily assessed.

Inasmuch as it is reasonable in light of the empirical rule to deem that he could have been aware, Nonparty 4 as such.

In outline of an illegal act, the village of both areas under the provisions of the relevant laws and regulations shall immediately be

The guidance and supervision of the affairs of the Department of Songwon, etc. or access to each facility for inspection or inspection;

Whether the act is committed by questioning the account books, documents, and other operating conditions of the facility;

After specific verification and examination, a complaint shall be filed if the violation constitutes criminal offences.

(1) order the improvement or suspension of the facilities, such as the village and the village and the village development center, or order the revocation of the license.

The non-party 4 should have been subject to the measures to compensate for damages to the network 000.

§ 133,00. "I will make a correction" or "I will make a correction", "I will make a reply by others, and return it thereafter."

If any measure is not taken in relation to the plaintiff, etc. later, the same as the attached Form shall be applied to the plaintiff, etc.

Since the act of assault, etc. was committed, such non-exercise of authority is considerably reasonable.

The decision is unlawful (the main sentence and proviso of Article 29(1) of the Constitution and the State compensation).

If Article 2 of the Act is interpreted in harmony with the purpose of legislation, a public official shall act in the course of performing his duties.

In case of causing damage to a person, other than the State or a local government liable for State compensation.

If an unauthorized individual is intentionally or by gross negligence, he/she shall be liable for damage caused by a tort.

in the case of a public official, if there is only a past room, the public official's individual shall be liable for damages caused by the tort.

In this context, gross negligence of a public official is ordinarily required by the public official.

without due care, if there is a little degree of attention, it is readily illegal and harmful.

In fact, even if the result can be predicted, it can only be overlooked, and it is almost similar to the intention like it.

It means a state of lack of due care.

(3) Accordingly, in accordance with Article 2 of the State Compensation Act, the defendant shall provide the plaintiffs with social welfare services.

shall take charge of the guidance and supervision of the Yang-si Village and Songwon, etc. which is a social welfare facility affiliated with a corporation.

the non-party 4 who is a public official is to perform his duties after February 3, 1997, the provisions of the relevant laws and regulations.

the guidance and supervision of the affairs of both villages and Songwons, etc., or withdrawal to each facility thereof under the jurisdiction of the

inspection or inquiry, inspection of the account books, documents, and other operating conditions of the facility, etc.;

after specifically checking and checking whether the violation has been committed, the violation has been committed in criminal cases.

In case of accusation, an accusation shall be made and the improvement of facilities or the suspension of business, such as the development of the two villages and the transmission center, shall be ordered;

(1) If the Plaintiff, etc. fails to take measures, etc. to cancel the license, the Plaintiff, etc.

A public official is liable to compensate for damages incurred by the act of assault, etc. (the defendant is a public official).

The Nonparty 4’s negligence on the part of the Non-Party 4 is liable to compensate for such negligence.

Part of the burden, etc. between the division and the country shall be clarified, and whether the non-party 4 can be claimed for compensation

of this case, however, the above matters are between the Gun and the country, or between the non-party 4

It is necessary to resolve the dispute between the plaintiff, etc. and the lawsuit of this case filed by the plaintiff, etc.

Therefore, it is not judged separately on this.

(d) Calculation of damages;

Furthermore, as to the amount of consolation money that the defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs, the plaintiff et al.

The grounds and circumstances of the lawsuit, and the period of detention of the plaintiff et al. after February 3, 1997 for both families and Song-wons.

(Plaintiff 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 16 remaining for 17 months, respectively, and Plaintiff 8 for 14 months.

Southern, Plaintiff 4 remains for 10 months, and the net 00 remains for 6 months) and violence, etc. committed against Plaintiff, etc.

In light of the degree of negligence of the plaintiff et al. and the various circumstances shown in the pleading in this case:

The amount of consolation money that the Defendant is liable to compensate for is the Plaintiff 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14;

5,000,000 won for plaintiffs 4, 3,000,000 won for plaintiffs, and 8 for plaintiffs

4. Determination as KRW 1,500,000, Plaintiff 15-A, and Plaintiff B as KRW 1,500,000, respectively (Defendants)

The plaintiff asserts that each of the above consolation money should be offset in consideration of the negligence of the plaintiff et al.

B. As to the amount of consolation money for mental suffering suffered by a tort, all the circumstances of the court

Considering that the court's discretion may be determined by the discretion of the plaintiff, etc., and the negligence of the plaintiff, etc.

It is only a reason to consider the consolation money in determining the consolation money, and it is separate from this, at the discretion of the party members.

The defendant does not have to offset the amount of consolation money which is confirmed as above again by negligence, so the defendant does not have to offset it again.

The above argument shall not be accepted.

4. Conclusion

If so, the defendant 5,00,00,000 each for plaintiffs 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, 7, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, and 16

Won, 3,000, 000 won for plaintiffs 8, 4,000, 4,000 won for plaintiffs 8, 15-A, 15-B respectively.

1. Plaintiffs 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, and 13, the part cited in the judgment of the first instance among the money of KRW 500,00 and each of the above money;

16 For each of the 3,00,000 won, 1,000 won, 1,000 won, 4, 9, 10, 10, 12, 14, 16

For each of the 2,00,000 won for plaintiffs 8, 500,000 won for plaintiffs 8, 15-A, and Na respectively

250, 000 won, following the delivery of the complaint of this case, from July 24, 1999 to May 31, 2003

section 5(5) per annum under the Civil Code, and from the next day to the day of full payment, the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings

Damages for delay at each rate of 20% per annum prescribed in the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings before the Amendment (203.

5. As prescribed by Presidential Decree in the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act (amended by Act No. 6868 of 10)

On April 24, 2003, the Constitutional Court made a decision of unconstitutionality as to the portion of the interest rate, and thereafter amended.

The legal provisions of the above Act and the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings amended accordingly;

Provisions on the interest rate (amended by Presidential Decree No. 17981, May 29, 2003) shall enforce the above amended Act.

The statutory interest rate applicable after June 1, 2003 to cases pending in the court at the time is 20% per annum.

Since the law of the court of first instance provides that the above amendment is enforced with respect to the amount cited by the court of first instance.

Until May 31, 2003, May 31, 2003, the rate of five percent per annum, which is a civil statutory interest rate, and from June 1, 2003 to the full payment rate.

The plaintiffs order the payment of damages for delay at each rate of 20 percent per annum in accordance with the above revised law.

As to Plaintiff 1, 3, 5, 6, 7, 11, 13, and 16, each of which is the additional cited amount by appeal

2 For the plaintiff 2, 00, 000 won, 4,000 won, 00 won, 9, 10, 12, and 14 respectively, 3,000, 000 won, 14

Won, 1,00, 00 won for plaintiffs 4, and 3, 500, 000 won for plaintiffs 8, and 15-A, and Na for plaintiffs 15

For each of 1, 250, 000 won, the defendant from July 24, 1999, the day following the service of the complaint of this case

(1) The decision of the court of the first instance that it is deemed reasonable to dispute the existence and scope of the obligation.

Until April 6, 2007, a class of 5% per annum under the Civil Act and a class of 5% from the following day to the day of full payment.

The obligation to pay damages for delay at each rate of 20% per annum as prescribed by the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Transmission.

As such, the plaintiffs' claims of this case are accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and they are justified;

The remaining claims shall be dismissed as they are without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance shall have different conclusions.

Since the appeal is partially accepted by the plaintiffs and the decision of the first instance court is modified as above:

It is so decided as per Disposition.

Judges Lee Gyeong-chul

Judges Kim Uniform-type

Judges Jind Crime

Site of separate sheet

Plaintiff 1.

On October 16, 1990, drinking and drinking in the place near the Yan River basin are frighting to a frighted village in the Yan River basin, and frighting into a frighted village.

Around July 1996, the Seoul Special Self-Governing Province of the Republic of Korea shall be dismissed from the office chief of the Non-Party 5.

On May 196, 1996, the non-party 6 work at the Gata bicycle plant, which was conducted by the non-party 6

In order to be hospitalized, the village continued to have been discharged on July 21, 1998.

Plaintiff 2.

On 196 October 26, 1996, when the party was forced to do so, it is the national situation of the Korea Exchange and the Korea Exchange.

The following day, the non-party 7, who is the chief of the office of escape, shall work at a family factory in the Guaea.

The chief of March 3, 1997 the office of the non-party 7 shall be the Guide belt to the non-party 7. From July 10, 1997 to the original 3 living together. The office of exchange shall be

In the present situation, it is replaced with other medicine. discharged on July 16, 1998.

Plaintiff 3.

On August 4, 1991, a family member who was sent to the astronomical basin and was admitted to the two-place village. The family member who was placed in the house and set forth in paragraph (1).

The contact with the people is changed, but it is possible to leave the electric cable. On 1997, it is possible to leave the electric cable.

He had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had had been. July, 1998

16.Discharge.

Plaintiff 4.

On June 27, 1993, the non-party 4 of the Yeong-gun Office of Yeong-gun was in mind on the Yan River basin on December 12, 1997.

G. The statement that he will return home and only that he will produce to the president of Non-party 3 on December 1997.

The right of infringement of human rights that he/she did not notify that he/she would be released from the outside by prohibiting the outside contact.

was discharged on December 12, 1997

Plaintiff 5.

On April 17, 1990, 199, such as the origin of an infant and the degree of food suicide. The use of a lush cartoon room is in a lush cartoon room.

The head of the office of Plaintiff 13, who was known in the past, will see his salary system. It will be seen that the head of the office of Plaintiff 13, who was known in the past, her salary system.

b) serve as the chief executive officer of the Working Group: . 195. Mesafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafafa

They are confined in daily newspapers. They will work for a mental and medicinal medicine on the side of the Song-won, and thereafter at a house of both families.

The non-party was discharged from July 20, 1998 to the head of the eight household factory.

Plaintiff 6.

on June 10, 1989, Jingrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgrgn

There is a fact that he was hospitalized in the National Mental Hospital on 1986 and discharged only one year after he was hospitalized in the National Mental Hospital.

Before having ever been good, the prisons have been admitted to the hospital. At the mental hospital of Korea, the hospital shall be admitted to the hospital at the hospital of Korea after the cerebral wave test.

Refusal to request discharge from 1 and 2 times a year in which punishment has been sentenced to 1 and 4 April 1991, on the grounds of refusal to work.

on March 15, 1992 as the mother of group escape, and so on a single life between nine months.

on May 11, 1998, after inquiring of the non-party 9 general secretary about whether a telegraphic health law has been enforced, etc.

The discharge on July 16, 1998.

Plaintiff 7.

On December 5, 1990, Dobomom's village at home to be Dobom's village. Hana Hospital's hospitalization for one month.

12. 21 On the 21st admission to the Song-won, on October 1992, contact with the police office and request the police office to contact with the police office on the 1992, so that it can be closed by the police office.

On December 12, 1997, the director of the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs (U.S.) shall discharge the director of the Ministry of Patriots and Veterans Affairs to request him to discharge him.

In other words, I would like to talk with the director of the mental division. I would refuse to talk with him. On December 24, 1997

In addition, it shall be Gotata-gu, Mata-gu, . 4, 1998, 11: 00 the place of work for Yang-si village at around 00.

From the end of the plant to the floor of the knivers, the knives of 3 to 4 times shall be discharged on July 16, 1998.

Plaintiff 8.

Admission on April 14, 1997: Non-party 3, the president of the Yangyang Village, on April 14, 1998, on May 4, 1998: 00

To admonish that there is a large amount of false remarks in a factory that makes banks among the workplaces located in the two villages;

During the process, the hand floor was 3 and 4 times later, and discharged on June 24, 1998.

Plaintiff 9.

on July 13, 1993 admission to the Yang Dong-dong Village incheon, without having contact with his family, a bank;

. On November 18, 1994, the body was closed at the time of the body inspection, and the brut brut brut brut brut brut brut brut, etc.

The President of Park Jong-young, the face of his face of his face, shall be left in a temporary factory. On July 16, 1998

(Lawsuit)

Plaintiff 10.

on April 1, 1994; hereinafter referred to as the "State's mistake", i.e., boarding and leaving a ship in the attitudes in which the Government intends to inform UN of it.

b) An ombudsman for both villages, which are located in the Coast Guard of the Thailand. The request for discharge was made, but the examination was not possible.

An interview has been almost rarely known. The interview must live in the earth with a stoxic conscience.

on July 16, 1998 discharged from Korea.

Plaintiff 11.

On September 27, 1991, 191, she was admitted to a two-place village by entrusting us with a large amount of drinking alcohol.

3. Transfer on December 12, 1991 to Song-won. On September 27, 1991, 199, she shall be transferred promptly from Nonparty 2, who is admitted. 5, 197

The discharge from office on September 27, 1998, as of September 27, 1998

Plaintiff 12.

On September 18, 1992, Nimging had been forced to be hospitalized in the Namyang Hospital and for two months had been admitted to the Songyang Hospital.

The drug called cp which was put to escape on October 1997, which was cp for six months at the Gima's own room.

Forced 196, 196, 190, 199, 200,000,000,000,000 won.

16.Discharge.

Plaintiff 13.

On December 2, 198, 198, e.g., alcoholic beverages from the Measures Institute and at the time of the border, admitted to the Yang-si Village. At the same time after one week.

The contact with the Jin-gun has been made by the Nin-gun as to why he was why he had his migration, and the contact will be made.

C. From 193 to 1993, the date of the construction of the Daejeon Giwon. The plaintiff was discharged on July 16, 1992 from the Republic of Korea.

Plaintiff 14.

on October 4, 1996, oms established in the astronomical basin and demanded to discharge from the office due to the danger of Mata; and

on July 23, 1998, discharged from military service.

Plaintiff 15. the network 000 - Plaintiff 15-A, who is a litigant,

On December 7, 1996, both villages shall be admitted to the area prior to the due diligence of the Measures Center. On December 10, 1996, the area shall be discharged from the area after the due diligence.

The non-party 3 was assaulted by the non-party 3 on the ground that the non-party's claim and the payment of wages are not made.

2. 1. When one’s sentence was found as both villages and was discharged on the ground that the relative was the relative.

2. 3. The Social Welfare Department of the Yeongi-Gun Office found the non-party 4 and was illegally detained in both villages.

They asserted that they were forced labor and assaulted, and that they were forced labor and assaulted, and that they were demanded compensation. They return to the Gun office.

The Non-Party 10, who is an employee of Eul, is assaulted to the Non-Party 10, etc., and re-able to the two village. February 13, 1997

An assault is committed by the president of Park Jong-gu at the time of that assault. An assault is committed by the Nonparty 4 at the time of that assault by the deceased 000.

The LPG, which was committed on August 20, 1997, is no more than several occasions thereafter, and is located in the two villages.

Influences are explosiond on August 28, 1997 and are detained as the crime of fire prevention against the suspender building.

Plaintiff 16.

On November 20, 198, Minju and Boan Boan Village. Lee Dong-dong shall obtain the property by fraud.

Korea-Japan is the same as the other. 4 days after having undergone cerebral wave tests, etc. at Daejeon Welfare Hospital, etc., on March 3, 1989.

Transfer. Because of the participation in a sprink case on March 17, 1992, the sponsing spons and girls and girls in both snows.

Rotaba Mataba, 6 July 16, 1998, on the grounds that only preparation for escape, shall be made as follows:

(b)the discharge;