The case recognizing liability for damages of the competent local government, in case where the players on the street have lost their self-help power due to electric power failure or electric shock while the stability of street lamps was flooded due to a centralized rain and the leakage occurred but did not take any measures to block the leakage;

The case holding that the competent district is liable for damages suffered by the deceased, their parents and siblings due to defects in the installation and management of street lamps, etc., as a vicarious joint and several liability manager, under Article 6 of the State Compensation Act, in case where the players who had been on the way lost their self-help power by electric power failure or reduction, and the street lamps themselves can be recognized to be defective in the stability that should have been normally equipped, and the competent district is the employer of the public officials under his jurisdiction, and the management agency of the street lamps, etc., which is the road and its appurtenances, is the road and its appurtenances, pursuant to Article 756 of the Civil Act, and Article 5 (1) of the State Compensation Act as the management agency of the street lamps, etc., which is the road and its appurtenances, under Article 6 of the State Compensation Act.

[1] Articles 750 and 756 of the Civil Act, Articles 5(1) and 6 of the State Compensation Act, Article 95(2) of the Local Autonomy Act, Article 44 of the Seoul Special Metropolitan City Ordinance on the Management of Major Facilities such as Road, etc.

[Defendant-Appellee-Appellant-Appellee-Appellant (Law Firm Pacific, Attorneys Nacheon-soo et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant-appellant)

Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and one other (Seocho Law Firm, Attorneys Park Sang-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 2002Na49240 delivered on June 4, 2003

1. The Defendant shall pay 182,128,160 won to each of the plaintiffs leap, 184,678,160 won to the plaintiffs kleap, 182,128,160 won to the plaintiff kleap, 95,88,764 won to the plaintiff gleap, 93,338,764 won to the plaintiff gleapap, 80,946,310 won to the plaintiff glecom, 78,396,310 won to the plaintiff glecom, klecom, kleap, plaintiff gleap, and klecom to the plaintiff glecom, and 25% of the amount from the following day to July 15, 2001 to July 23, 2002, and 25% of the amount to each of them.

2. The plaintiffs' respective remaining claims against the defendants are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit are five minutes and one is the plaintiffs' and the rest of the defendants.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to Plaintiffs 222,261,659 won in gold 219,261,659 won in gold 219,635,681 won in gold 109,635,681 won in gold 106,635,681 won in gold 106,723,527 won in gold 96,723,527 won in the Plaintiff Hong Jong-gu, the maximum of 193,723,527 won in gold 93,723,527 in gold son, the Plaintiff son’s leap, the interest leap, the Plaintiff leap, the interest leap, the Defendant’s interest, and the Defendant’s interest leap, each of which was paid from July 15, 2001 to the date of service of the modification of the claims and the cause of the claims in this case, and from the next day to 25% in full payment per annum.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Facts of recognition

(1)In the front of the promotion apartment zone located in Seocho-gu Seoul, Seocho-gu, Seocho-gu, Seoul, from around 02:40 on July 15, 2001 to around 04:30 on the same day, the outer leaples, Lee Jin, Lee Jin, and Lee Hong-sle returned a road that has 130 centimeters or more in size on the sidewalk base due to the concentrated rain coming in Seoul area, as seen later, while returning a road that has 130 centimeters or more in size on the front of the promotion apartment, the street lamps in front of the promotion apartment (number 14-2, measuring instruments number 510216, hereinafter referred to as "the street of this case") was cut or turned down under the influence of the leaples (hereinafter referred to as "the accident of this case").

(2) The Seocho-ro (hereinafter referred to as the "Road of this case") in which the street of this case is located is the Special Metropolitan City (City/Do) owned by the Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City"), the width of which is not less than 20 meters, and the cost of installation, improvement, repair and maintenance of the above road and the street of this case, which are accessories to the above road under the Regulations on the Financial Obligations between Seoul Special Metropolitan City and autonomous Gu, shall be borne by the Defendant Seoul Special Metropolitan City, and the cost of installation, improvement, repair and maintenance of the street of this case shall be delegated to the Defendant Seocho-gu Seoul Special Metropolitan City (hereinafter referred to as the "Defendant Seocho-gu").

(3) The Plaintiff’s leap, Kim Jong-young’s parents, Plaintiff Lee Jin’s Lee Jin, Lee Jin’s parents, Plaintiff Hong-Jin’s Hong-Jin, Plaintiff Hong-Jin’s parents, Plaintiff Hong-Jin’s parents after the net red net, Plaintiff Yoon-Jin’s leapin’s leapin, Plaintiff Lee Ho-Jin’s leap, Plaintiff Lee Ho-Jin’s leap, and Plaintiff Hong-Jin’s leap, respectively.

(Evidence) Evidence No. 1-3, Evidence No. 2-1 through 5, Evidence No. 3-1, 2, Evidence No. 4, Evidence No. 5, Evidence No. 7, Evidence No. 8-70, and 71

(b) Markets:

In light of the above facts, Gap's evidence and evidence Nos. 8, 12, 17 through 19, 23, 65, and 79, Gap's evidence Nos. 23, and Gap's evidence Nos. 24, and the whole purport of oral argument that the defendant's construction of the road Nos. 9 of this case's street Nos. 9 was not likely to cause damages to the road No. 8 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No. 9 of this case's street No.

The defendant Seocho-gu planned to extend the roads from the road expansion project, but failed to implement the project due to the lack of budget execution from the defendant Seoul Metropolitan Government. The defendant Seocho-gu also failed to implement the project for the same reason. As long as the defendant Seoul Metropolitan Government did not provide the above budget, it is impossible to improve the street lamps of the defendant Seocho-gu, so the defendant is not responsible for the improvement of the street lamps of the defendant Seocho-gu

However, Defendant Seocho-gu is obligated to maintain and manage street lamps and electric utility facilities so that vehicle drivers and pedestrians can safely walk, as the subject of the management affairs of the road of this case and the street lamps, which are attached thereto. Although Defendant Seocho-gu did not compile and approve the necessary budget, Defendant Seocho-gu cannot avoid the obligation of management of such street lamps solely on such circumstance. Thus, Defendant Seocho-gu’s above assertion is without merit.

C. Limitation on liability

As of July 14, 201, 200 to July 15, 2001, the Defendant’s natural history of this case from 23:00 to 05:00 per hour is 102 meters long, and the maximum strength of this case is 74.3 meters long, which is the current sewerage design standard (10-year frequency), and the strength of rainfall exceeding 62.2 meters long, among those of the above deceased, was benefiting from the maintenance of the road, and thus, it is difficult to view that the Defendants’ natural history of this case’s water supply from 10:0 to 100 to 15:0, and thus, it is difficult to view that the Defendants’ natural history of this case’s water supply of this case’s water supply could not be considered as a cause for the removal of the foregoing accident and expansion of the road’s water supply. However, it is difficult to consider that the Defendants’ natural history was 50% of the water supply of this case’s water supply to prevent the occurrence and expansion of the road’s.

2. Scope of damages.

(a) Net leap;

(1) Actual income

(A) Basic facts

(1) Gender for each gender: Southern (Woo, February 15, 1974)

Age at the time of an accident: 27 years and 5 months;

Name of rental: 45.15 years;

Residential area: Seoul, urban area;

(2) Directing business.

On May 26, 200, the deceased leap was employed as a graduate-in employee in the Eshae, Co., Ltd., Ltd. on May 26, 200, and served as a store member at the 1st day of July 15, 2001, which was at the time of the instant accident.

(3) Age and maximum working age

The retirement age of employees working at the TS Seama Co., Ltd. is until the date when they reach 55 years of age, and the operation period of an ordinary part-time employee for urban day by the 22th day of each month until the date when they reach 60 years of age.

(4) Cost of living.

1/3 of revenues

(b) Mountain village: 338,594,096 won (gold 324,213,560 won + 14,380,536 won);

(1) The period from an accident to retirement age.

(1) Basic pay: The amount stated in attached Form 1;

(B) Sub-grade : 320,000 won

Category of duties to be caused: 100,000 won

C intent bonus: Money stated in attached Form bonus;

Postal settlement: The amount calculated at the present price at the time of the accident in this case is KRW 486,320,341 as shown in the attached Form, and if the living expenses are deducted therefrom, the actual income during the above period shall be KRW 324,213,560 (486,320,341 x 2/3).

(2) Period between retirement age and maximum working age

From February 16, 2029 following the retirement day to February 15, 2034, the 22th day of each month, from February 16, 2029 to February 15, 2034, and the urban daily wage of an adult male in the first half-year in 2002 to 40,922, each month, 90,284 won (40,92 x 22), and 14,380,536 won (90,284 x 284 x 2905 x 2/307.05) after deducting living expenses).

(2) A daily retirement allowance;

(A) Basic facts

On May 26, 200, the deceased leap was able to work until February 15, 2029 between the age of 55 and the age of 55. However, due to the instant accident, he retired on July 15, 2001.

(b) Calculation of retirement allowances;

(1) Estimated total retirement allowances.

For each year of continuous service, 30 days' average wage for each year of continuous service (Provided, That for each year of continuous service, the number of days' wage for each year);

The annual average wage: 2,743,90 won [basic salary 2,323,90 x 320,000 x 320,000 x 3 months x 3 months x 100,000 x 3 months x 3 months x 1/3 months x 1/3 months) equivalent to the amount obtained by dividing the estimated bonus to be paid within one year retroactively from the date of the ordinary retirement by 12 x 1,335,862 x 7,896,70 won [2,256,200 x 350%) £« 8,133,650 (2,39, 2390 x 3050 x 239,470] of the estimated bonus paid for the three months immediately before the date of the ordinary retirement x 1,35,862 won [30%) of the estimated bonus paid within one year retroactively from the date of the ordinary retirement];

(b) Long-term continuous years: The number of continuous years from May 26, 200, which is the date of the membership of the net base, to February 15, 2029, which is the scheduled date of retirement from May 26, 200, is August 21, 2029, and the total number of continuous years calculated on a daily basis is 28.7242 (28+8/12 + 21/365).

Financially disabled person: Monthly average wage ¡¿ the total continuous service coefficient =4,079,762 ¡¿ 28.72 = gold 117,187,89 won

(2) The calculation of retirement allowances in a day;

The above gold 117,187,89 won is calculated at the present price at the time of the instant accident in accordance with the Hofmanial Calculation Act, 49,254,073 won 117,187,89 won x 0.4203 [1/1/0 (1 +05 x 27.583)]. The retirement allowance for one-time retirement calculated by deducting the retirement allowance of 1,64,263 won already received is KRW 47,589,810.

(c) Funeral expenses: 3,000,000 won;

(Evidence)Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 9 to 13, Gap evidence 15 to 17, testimony of witness afforestation

(4) Limitation of liability:

(A) Liability ratio of the Defendants: 85%

(b) mountain.

(1) Property losses of a lost leap: 328,256,320 won [38,594,096 won (338,594,096 won in lost earnings + 47,589,810 won in lost retirement allowances] 328,256,320 won

② Funeral expenses loss of Plaintiff leap: 2,550,000 won (3,00,000 won x 0.85)

(5) Consolation money

(A) The instant accident is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff, as well as his parents, was suffering from considerable mental pain, and thus, is obligated to do so in money.

(B) Reasons for consideration: the net leap and the age, family relationship, the course and result of the instant case, and all other circumstances shown in the instant argument.

(c) Amount determined: Net leap (gold 20,000,000)

Plaintiff Yoon-sung, Kim Ho-sung (each gold 8,000,000)

Plaintiff 100,000,000

(6) Trade unions; and

348,256,320 won (property damage amounting to KRW 328,256,320 + KRW 20,000 + KRW 20,000) total amount of damages of the deceased leap, respectively, succeeded to KRW 174,128,160 (gold KRW 348,256,320 x 1/2) in accordance with the statutory share of inheritance.

(7) Sub-committee

The defendants are obligated to pay 184,678,160 won for each of the plaintiffs leap (legally inherited KRW 174,128,160 + funeral expenses + KRW 2,550,000 + funeral expenses + KRW 8,000), gold 182,128,160 won for the plaintiff kleap (legal inheritance + KRW 174,128,160 + KRW 8,00,000) for the plaintiff kleap, and delayed payment for each of them.

(b) The name of the net;

(1) Actual income

(A) Basic facts

(1) Gender for each gender: Southern (Sweon September 27, 1976)

Age at the time of an accident: 24 years and 9 months;

Name of rental: 47.97

Byung: Handcil

(2) Financial assessment of the base of living and the capability to operate.

The pre-stigious name shall be calculated on the basis of the income level of the pre-stigious male workers at least after graduating from a university, since the plaintiff Lee Jin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-sin-s

(Evidence)Unsatisfy, Gap evidence 3-3, Gap evidence 9, and Gap evidence 18-20

(b) Sub-committee mountain: From March 1, 2002 after graduation from the university, for the period of 414 months from September 27, 2036, which became the maximum working age of the university, to September 27, 2036, the maximum working age of the university was at least 1,056,63 won per month, and the average annual special pay amount of KRW 43,241 (amount of KRW 518,903 x1/12), which is the sum of the monthly wage of the former-type workers whose career is less than one year, and which is the sum of KRW 1,09,874 won per month.

(3) Cost of living.

1/3 of revenues

(B) Mountain village: On March 1, 2002, 202, 200, after the deceased deceased's graduation from a university, deducted living expenses from the revenue that could have been earned until the age of 60,00, which is the maximum working age, and if it is calculated at the present price at the time of the instant accident in accordance with the Hofmanial Calculation Act, the lost income shall be gold 172,561,798 won [1,09,874 won x 2/3 x 2/3 243.19-7.8534].

(b) Funeral expenses: 3,000,000 won;

(3) Limitation of liability:

(A) Liability ratio of the Defendants: 85%

(b) mountain.

(1) Property damage under a lost interest: 146,677,528 won (172, 561,798 won x 0.85)

② Funeral expenses incurred in relation to the Plaintiff’s secondary school: 2,550,000 won (3,00,000 won x 0.85)

(4) Consolation money

(A) The instant accident is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the Plaintiff Egymnasium, Egymnasium, Egymnasium, Egymnasium, Egymnasium, and Egymnas that Plaintiff Egymnas suffered considerable mental pain due to the instant accident.

(B) Reasons for consideration: The deceased Jin-jin and the age, family relationship, the course and result of the instant case, and all other circumstances shown in the instant argument.

(c) Amount determined: Net interest (gold 20,000,000)

Plaintiff Egrasium, Egrasium (No. 10,000,000)

Plaintiff Lee Jae-soo (Seoul High Court Decision 3,000,000

(5) In the case of

166,677,528 won (146,67,528 won + 20,000,000 won + 146,677,528 won in property damage + 20,000 won in property damage) of the deceased Lee Jin-jin succeeded to 83,338,764 won in each of the plaintiffs Lee Han-tae and Lee Jong-ri (166,67,528 won x 1/2) according to their statutory shares in inheritance.

(6) Sub-committee

The Defendants are obligated to pay 95,88,764 won (legally inherited KRW 83,338,764 + Funeral expenses + KRW 2,550,000 + 10,000 + 10,000 + 93,338,764 won (legally inherited portion of KRW 83,338,764 + 10,000 + 10,000,000 won), and damages for delay to the Plaintiff’s interest.

(c) Net red net;

(1) Actual income

(A) Basic facts

(1) Gender for each gender: Southern (Woo, February 13, 1983)

Age at the time of an accident: 18 years and 5 months;

Name of rental: 53.62 years;

Sick Station: dolusium

(2) Financial assessment of the base of living and the capability to operate.

The net Red Cross did not yet complete military service at the time of the instant accident, and did not have any income in the state of temporary absence from June 29 to the time of the accident from June 201 of the same year, and the daily wage of an urban average worker was 40,922 won, and the monthly average working day in light of empirical rule was 22 days, and the maximum working age was 60 years (the plaintiff Hong Sejong, the maximum working day was 10 years old, and the plaintiff Hong 20 years old, which was 20 years old, were 4 years old, 3 years old, and 20 years old, the average working day was 20 years old, and the average working day was 20 years old, and there was no lack of evidence to acknowledge that the period was 16 years old, 20 years old, 20 years old, and 16 months old, 3 years old, after the graduation of the university. However, the Minister of National Defense did not recognize that the period was 16 months old, 20 years old, and 16 months old.

(3) Cost of living.

1/3 of revenues

(B) Mountain village: The actual income shall be gold 137,403,084 won [90,284 x 2/3 x 2/3 269.256-40.3231] if it is calculated at the present price at the time of the instant case after deducting the living expenses.

(b) Funeral expenses: 3,000,000 won;

(Evidence) contain no dispute, Gap evidence 9, Gap evidence 17, and Gap evidence 21

(3) Limitation of liability:

(A) Liability ratio of the Defendants: 85%

(b) mountain.

(1) Property damage after the net net: 116,792,621 won (137,403,084 won x 0.85)

② Funeral expenses incurred in relation to the Plaintiff’s red consultations: KRW 2,550,000 ( KRW 3,000,000 x 0.85)

(4) Consolation money

(A) The instant accident is obvious in light of the empirical rule that Plaintiff Hong-Jin, the parent of his parents, Plaintiff Hong-Jin, the Plaintiff Hong-Jin, the Plaintiff Hong-Jin, and the South East East, suffered considerable mental pain, and thus, is obliged to do so in money.

(B) Reasons for consideration: the net red net and the age, family relationship, details and result of the instant case, and all other circumstances shown in the instant argument.

(c) Amount determined: net red net (gold 20,000,000)

Plaintiff Hong-Jinc, Choi Ho-young (No. 10,000,000 respectively)

Plaintiff Red Sheet (Seoul 3,000,000)

(5) In the case of

The total amount of damages after the net red net KRW 136,792,621 (116,792,621 + 20,000 + 20,000 + 136,792,621 + 116,621 + 20,000 + 68,396,310, respectively, (136,792,621 x 1/2) of the Plaintiff Red Trade and the largest amount of damages according to statutory shares in inheritance.

(6) Sub-committee

The Defendants are obligated to pay 80,946,310 won for each of the plaintiffs Hong Sejong Cooperative (legally inherited KRW 68,396,310 + funeral expenses + KRW 2,550,000 + funeral expenses + KRW 10,000), 78,396,310 won for the plaintiff Kim Jong-young (legally inherited KRW 68,396,310 + KRW 10,000 + 3,000) for each of the plaintiff Hong F1, and damages for delay.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendants are not obligated to pay 182,128,160 won to each of the plaintiffs leap, 182,128,160 won to the plaintiff leap, 95,88,764 won to the plaintiff leapap, 93,338,764 won to the plaintiff leapcom, 80,3946,310 won to the plaintiff leapcom, 78,396,310 won to the plaintiff leapcom, 396,310 won to the plaintiff leapcom, 184,678,160 won, and 3,000,000 won to the plaintiff leapcom, and 182,88,764 won to the plaintiff leapcom, e.g., the plaintiff e., e., e., e., the remaining damages for delay within the limit of 25% per annum of each of the plaintiffs 20.

Judges Park Jae-ho (Presiding Judge)