(a) Transferability of the right to claim compensation under Article 14(1) of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act;

B. Scope of damage suffered by the victim under the above provision of the law

A. The right to claim for compensation under Article 14(1) of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act is a monetary claim and its transfer is possible as there is no reasonable ground to restrict its transfer. The above right to claim for compensation is prohibited from seizure as a right under public law, and its transfer cannot be denied.

B. The damage suffered by the victim under the provision of the above Act includes not only the damage the victim suffered in reality by paying direct medical expenses, etc. but also the victim bears the obligation of paying medical expenses after receiving medical treatment at the hospital, etc.

Article 14 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act

Public Officials and Private School Fees Insurance Corporation;

Republic of Korea and one other

Seoul Central District Court (89 Ghana94319) in the first instance trial

1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant's Republic of Korea shall be modified as follows:

A. Defendant Republic of Korea shall pay to the Plaintiff the annual interest rate of 502,370 won and the annual interest rate of 5% from September 2, 1989 to October 17, 1989, and the annual interest rate of 25% from the next day to the day of full payment.

B. The plaintiff's remaining claims against the defendant Republic of Korea are dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendant Korea Automobile Insurance Company is dismissed.

3. The litigation costs incurred between the Plaintiff and the Defendant Republic of Korea shall be borne by the Defendant’s Republic of Korea through the first and second instances, and the Plaintiff’s appeal costs against the Defendant Korea Automobile Insurance Company shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

4. Any portion exceeding the amount ordered under paragraph (1) of the order of the court of first instance among the part of paragraph (1) may be provisionally executed.

The part against the plaintiff among the part against the defendant in the judgment of the first instance against the Republic of Korea and the part against the defendant Korea Automobile Insurance Corporation shall be revoked.

The defendants pay to each plaintiff 502,370 won with 25% interest per annum from the next day of service of the application for extension of claim and the application for correction of cause of claim as of August 28, 1989 to the day of full payment.

The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the Defendants through the first and second trials, and a declaration of provisional execution (the Plaintiff amended the purport of the claim in the trial).

A. Determination on the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant Republic of Korea

In full view of Gap evidence Nos. 2-4 (A's confirmation of the facts of traffic accident), Gap evidence Nos. 3-1, 2 (C's statement of medical expenses), Nos. 4-2, 3 (Notice of Assignment of Claims), Gap evidence Nos. 2-2 (accident No. 4-1), and Gap evidence Nos. 4-1 (mortgage No. 4), and the testimony of the above witness, Non-party No. 3, the dependent of Non-party No. 2 (public official of the Office of Education of Jindo-si), the insured of medical insurance under the Act on the Medical Insurance for Public Officials and Private School Teachers and Staff, transferred them to the plaintiff on Sep. 23, 1987; No. 1500, Sep. 22, 1987; and the part of private document No. 4-2, 203 (Notice of Claim No. 1); the plaintiff paid the remainder of the insurance benefits to the defendant No. 1, 300,5000,5,000,0

However, Article 14(1) of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act provides that the Government shall compensate the person who died or was injured due to the operation of a motor vehicle, the holder of which is unknown, within the limit of liability insurance, at the victim’s request. Article 14(3) of the same Act provides that the amount to be compensated by the Government pursuant to the provisions of paragraph (1) of the same Article shall be prescribed by the Presidential Decree. Article 3(1) of the same Act provides that in the case of injury, the amount of compensation to be compensated by the Government pursuant to the provisions of Article 14(1) of the same Act shall be the amount prescribed in the attached Table 1 of the same Act and the amount of actual damage shall not exceed the amount of actual damage. Accordingly, the degree of injury of Non-party 3 is set forth in the attached Table 1 (in this case, at least two levels of injury of non-party 6th class 11 of the above Enforcement Decree, and the upper limit of the amount of compensation shall not be considered as 1,300,000 won.

Therefore, the right to claim compensation under the above law is identical to the defendant's assertion, but it is not naturally prohibited from transfer, and it is possible to transfer the claim if the transfer is not prohibited under the nature of the claim or the provisions of the law, and in light of the nature of the claim or the provisions of the law, it is possible to transfer it unless the transfer is prohibited under the above law. The right to claim compensation against the State under the above law is a monetary claim and there is no reasonable ground to limit its transfer, and Article 19 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act provides that the above right to claim compensation can not be seized. However, the above right to claim compensation under the State Compensation Act Article 4 of the State Compensation Act, Article 16 (2) of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, Article 47 of the Medical Insurance Act, Article 47 of the Medical Insurance Act, and Article 47 of the Medical Insurance Act of public officials and private school teachers and staff. Therefore, the above assertion is not accepted.

As long as the Plaintiff provided insurance benefits to Nonparty 3 pursuant to the Medical Insurance Act for Public Officials and Private School Teachers and Staff, this is based on the Plaintiff’s legal obligation, which is operated by the State’s social security policy as well as the claim for compensation or medical insurance under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act. Thus, the Plaintiff, who provided the amount equivalent to the insurance benefits (in this case, the amount KRW 397,590) of the Plaintiff, cannot transfer it to the State, and thus, the transfer of that portion cannot be deemed null and void. However, solely on the same ground, the instant claim cannot be accepted.

The defendant's Republic of Korea also refers to the amount of damage under the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act and the Enforcement Decree of the same Act. In this case, the non-party 3 only paid 104,700 won to the above Handong Hospital. Thus, the non-party 3 merely has the right to claim compensation equivalent to 104,780 won of the principal's share to the defendant's Republic of Korea. Therefore, the transfer of the part exceeding the above amount to the plaintiff's assignment of claims against the plaintiff is null and void. Thus, the damage under the above Act is not limited to the time when the victim actually suffered from the loss due to the operation of the motor vehicle where the victim's identity is unknown, but it includes the obligation to pay medical expenses by receiving medical treatment at the hospital, etc., and the victim's injury is not limited to the time when the victim actually suffered from the loss due to the operation of the motor vehicle where the victim is unknown. Thus, the government is exempted from the liability of compensation under the above Act or the Enforcement Decree of the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act.

B. Determination on the claim against Defendant Korea Automobile Insurance Co., Ltd.

The plaintiff is the cause of the claim against the defendant Korean Automobile Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter the defendant Korean Automobile Insurance Co., Ltd.). Since the defendant Korean Automobile Insurance Co., Ltd. was entrusted with the authority of the State to guarantee automobile accident compensation pursuant to Article 28 (1) of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act, the non-party 3 has the right to claim compensation against the defendant Korean Automobile Insurance, and the non-party 3 transferred the right to claim compensation against the defendant Korean Automobile Insurance to the plaintiff on May 8, 1989 and notified it to the defendant Korean Automobile Insurance at that time, the defendant Korean Automobile Insurance Co., Ltd. has the obligation to pay the above amount to the plaintiff. Thus, Article 28 (1) of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act provides that the Minister of Construction and Transportation may entrust the authority of the Government to the person designated in consultation with the Minister of Finance and Economy under the conditions as prescribed by the Presidential Decree. The fact that the defendant Korean Automobile Insurance Co., Ltd. designated as the truster of automobile accident compensation business under the above provision does not have any dispute between the parties.

C. Conclusion

Therefore, as the plaintiff seeks, the defendant Republic of Korea is obligated to pay to the plaintiff damages for delay at each rate of 502,370 won and the rate of 50% per annum under the Civil Act from September 10, 1989 to October 17, 1989, which is the next day after the copy of the application for extension of claim and correction of cause of claim from August 28, 1989 to the defendant Republic of Korea was delivered to the defendant Republic of Korea. The plaintiff is obligated to pay damages for delay at each rate of 5% per annum under the Special Act on the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the day of full payment (the plaintiff also filed damages for delay at the above rate of 502,370 won with respect to the judgment of the appellate court of this case. Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case within the above period is justified, and the remainder of the claim shall be accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the plaintiff's modification of the purport of the claim against the defendant 19.

Judges Kang Nung-dong (Presiding Judge) Kim Dong-ho