1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, KRW 1,500,000 against the Plaintiff as to the Defendant and its related thereto from August 10, 2014 to May 15, 2019.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and thus, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance.

2. In full view of the following circumstances, the Defendant’s police officers’ act of taking the Plaintiff’s handets and demanding a drinking test at E zone is unlawful. The Defendant’s above act of the police officers under the Defendant’s control falls under the protective measure provided in the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers or the use of police gear provided in the Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers or voluntary movement with the Plaintiff’s consent, and thus, cannot be deemed lawful. Accordingly, the Defendant is liable for damages incurred by the Plaintiff due to the police officers’ unlawful performance of their official duties pursuant to the main sentence of Article 2(1) of the State Compensation Act. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff’s aforementioned act of taking the Defendant’s hand over to E zone with the Plaintiff’s hand, and the Plaintiff’s request for a drinking test at the same time is unlawful. The Defendant’s aforementioned act of the police officers under his control falls under the use of the police gear and the Defendant’s voluntary movement with the Plaintiff’s consent. However, the Defendant did not have any other evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s safe arrival during the above process.

In this situation, it is difficult to see that the Plaintiff was in danger of leading up to the river or causing other traffic accidents by driving the car with a sudden driver.

B. The plaintiff also divided the dialogue with the fire officers dispatched to the scene, and the plaintiff is at the site.