The case holding that there is negligence on the part of the public official in charge of accidents caused by the failure of the prevention facilities to prevent the danger in the tidal wave pool which occurred in the execution of reclamation works

In the execution of reclamation works as part of a land readjustment project by Seoul Metropolitan Government, there is a negligence on the public official in charge of such construction in the case where the residents have lost the right by neglecting the drainage facilities or prevention of danger with respect to the pool formed in the land consolidation project, and the drainage facilities or prevention facilities are not deferred.

Article 2 (1) of the State Compensation Act

Plaintiff 1 et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellee

Attorney Kim Chang-soo, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 77Na1504 delivered on April 3, 1978

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The defendant's attorney's grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the judgment of the court below, at around 12:0 of May 31, 1976, the non-party, who is the plaintiff's son, recognized that the above 5th anniversary of the above 8th anniversary of the plaintiff's negligence in Samsungdong-dong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government and about 400 square meters formed around the 608th unit of Samsungdong-gu, under the premise that there is no dispute between the parties, and that the above 608 and 609 unit of the construction work were constructed in accordance with the design of the Si, and that the above 4th unit of the damages caused by the accident was no more than 30 meters away from the above 5th unit of the plaintiff's negligence and the above 30th unit of the 5th unit of the 197th unit of the 197th unit of the 3rd unit of the 5th unit of the 1972 unit of the 3rd unit of the 197th unit of the disaster and the 38.4th unit of the 7th unit of the disaster.

Examining the whole purport of the oral evidence and oral argument of the court below in comparison with the records, the judgment of the court below that recognized the liability for damages to the defendant Si on the grounds as stated in its reasoning is just and reasonable. The judgment of the court below that recognized the liability for damages to the defendant Si is not premised on the occurrence of the accident in this case due to the defect in the installation and management of the pool in the public structures, but on the premise that there is no premise that the accident occurred due to the defect in the construction and management of the facilities, the design of the reclamation work of the 608 and 609 Do block, which is part of the project for the rearrangement of the defendant city, shall be modified to lower the cost of the prevention by making it lower than that of other surrounding land, and there is the negligence of the public official belonging to the defendant city in charge of the prevention of drainage or prevention of danger, and therefore, the purport of the judgment of the court below on the premise that the accident in this case occurred. Moreover, the theory of the court below's judgment on the premise that the error in the construction and management of the public domain is unreasonable.

Therefore, the defendant's appeal against the plaintiffs is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the losing defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Presiding Justice (Presiding Justice)