Irregular disposal of gasoline by a driver and on-duty;

In accordance with the direction of the mid-to-date commander, the driver's disease belonging to the string truck was examined in the middle-line under his control and at the same time the accident occurred that caused the victims to die at the same time in the process of the illegal disposal of gasoline from among the Do which returned back to the Do, but in relation to a third party (victim) who is not the participating parties with the knowledge of the fact of the above illegal disposal, it cannot be viewed as an unfair observation that the above gasoline handling act by a third party as a public official when objectively observe the appearance of the above act is regarded as an act of duties of the above driver's.

Article 2 of the State Compensation Act

Plaintiff 1 and one other

Countries

Seoul High Court Decision 65Na2203 delivered on June 29, 1966, Seoul High Court Decision 65Na2203 delivered on July 29, 196

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal No. 1 by the defendant is examined.

According to the judgment of the court below, Non-party 1 was a driver of Non-party 1 519 on the Army construction jun, and Non-party 1 was the non-party 1's own jun of Non-party 1's own jun of 1/4 on August 5, 1964. Non-party 1 was the non-party 4's own jun of 5's own jun of 5's own jun of 5's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own 6's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own jun's own 4th's own ju's own ju.

The grounds of appeal No. 2 are examined.

Comprehensively taking account of the evidence presented by the original judgment, the act of Nonparty 1, such as the original judgment, is not recognized as being grossly negligent, and the arguments can not be adopted since they have nothing to criticize the original judgment’s legitimate preparation of evidence and fact-finding.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed without merit. The costs of the appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) Mag-kim Kim-bun and Magman