After school, the outside person possis and kills the student on the premises of the school, and the duty of the school to protect and supervise the side of the school.

The student's right to receive education shall include the right to receive education safely in the school. For this purpose, the scope of the duty of protection imposed on the school is the duty to protect and supervise ordinary educational activities and other accidents that may normally occur in relation to the student's activities closely related thereto. Thus, if external students murdered with knife a student who fife in the school after 1 hour after school and after her death with knife in connection with ordinary educational activities or other activities closely related thereto, this cannot be seen as an accident that may occur in the school's premises, and it cannot be seen as a duty of care to install a wall high and solid in the school boundary to prevent any accident that may occur in the school regardless of ordinary educational activities in the school, and to have the security guards or teachers patrol or to devise all measures to prevent all accidents that may occur in the course of returning to the school.

Articles 750 and 758 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff 1 and two others

School juristic persons

Suwon District Court of the first instance (Seoul High Court Decision 89Gahap1076)

The plaintiffs' appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The judgment of the court below shall be revoked.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 23,11,435 won, 22,165,445 won, 2,000 won to the plaintiff 3, and 5% per annum from January 13, 1989 to the date of this decision, and 25% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

The costs of lawsuit shall be assessed against the defendant in both the first and second instances and a declaration of provisional execution.

No. 1 (No. 2), Gap evidence 2 (Death), Eul evidence 6-3 (written opinion), 5 through 8,10, 11 (each written statement), 12 through 15 (each written protocol), 16 through 19, 21 through 24 (each protocol of examination of suspect), and 20 (Evidence Protocol) without dispute over the establishment, the non-party 1, 2, 3, and 4, etc., to find out the remaining part of the plaintiff's knife in front of the above knife of the plaintiff's knife of the defendant's knife, Sungnam-dong, Sungnam-si, and the non-party 2, who was playing near the knife of the knife of the plaintiff's knife of the above knife of the plaintiff's knife of the above knife of the plaintiff's knife of the above knife of the plaintiff's.

The plaintiffs claim of this case. (Name omitted) The defendant is a person operating a high school and a sexual female middle school, and the defendant has established a high and solid fence on the school boundary, and have security guards and teachers observe the school premises and patrol the outside, and take appropriate measures so that defective students other than the above students do not have access to the school premises. The defendant asserts that the above non-party's above non-party 5 died from the defect in the school premises as above, because he did not take such measures and neglected to take measures so that students do not suffer damage from the defect in the school, and that students do not attend the school until they escape the school premises at least, and that he did not attend the school, and even if he did not attend the school and failed to find the request for rescue as seen in the above, the defendant is liable for damages caused by the above negligence that the above non-party 5 died from the defect in the school premises and caused the plaintiffs' property and mental relation as seen above by his non-party 5 and his employees.

The right to receive education is also included in the right to receive education within the school. The scope of the duty to protect the deceased's children to be borne by the school is the duty to protect and supervise an accident that may normally arise in connection with his ordinary educational activities and activities closely related thereto. According to the evidence No. 1 (Opening 88 Year) and No. 3 (Agreement) of the above school, the non-party 5 did not have any dispute over the establishment of the school, and the non-party 1 did not have any duty to protect the deceased's school from entering the school for the purpose of preventing them from being exposed to the non-party 1's school's internal accident. The non-party 1's duty to protect the deceased's school's internal accident and the non-party 1's school's internal accident that the non-party 4's internal accident and the non-party 5's non-party 1's internal accident and the non-party 5's non-party 1's non-party 5's internal accident and the non-party 1's middle school's internal accident.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim for damages of this case, which is sought from the defendant on the premise that there was an error in the accident of this case, is dismissed in its entirety because there is no need to further examine the remaining points, and the judgment of the court below is just and without merit, and the appeal by the plaintiffs who have caused the same error is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs who have lost them.

Judges Suspension-type (Presiding Judge) Kim Il-jin Kim Jin-jin