logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1994. 10. 14. 선고 94다14018 판결
[손해배상(자)][공1994.11.15.(980),2978]
Main Issues

Nature of money received as criminal agreement in the course of investigation or criminal trial;

Summary of Judgment

In the course of the investigation or criminal trial against the perpetrator of a tort, where the victim agreed that he/she shall not be punished against the perpetrator by receiving the money in the name of agreement from the perpetrator, it shall be reasonable to deem that the money was paid as part of the compensation for property damage, unless there are special circumstances, such as clearly stating that he/she would be paid the money as consolation money, in particular.

[Reference Provisions]

Civil Act Article 763 (Article 393)

Reference Cases

[Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Han, Attorneys Park Jae-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant-appellee)

Plaintiff-Appellant

Plaintiff 1 et al., and 1 others, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellee and 2 others

Defendant-Appellee

Defendant 2-Appellant

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 92Na40237 delivered on January 20, 1994

Text

All appeals are dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal are examined.

In the course of investigation or criminal trial against the perpetrator of a tort, where the victim agreed that he would not be punished against the perpetrator, it shall be reasonable to view that the amount was paid as part of compensation for property damage unless there are special circumstances such as clearly stating that the amount received at the time of the agreement is paid as consolation money (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 87Meu313, May 24, 1988). Therefore, the court below is just in holding that the agreed amount received by the plaintiffs from the defendant in the course of investigation against the defendant was paid as part of compensation for property damage of the plaintiffs. In this regard, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles, such as the theory of lawsuit.

Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Jong-ho (Presiding Justice)

arrow