There is negligence of the first person working at the same time who launched immediately ball cartridges without warning to the victim approaching the military unit without listening to the water;

In the event of discovery of a person approaching a military unit at night, the sentry's disease is judged to be fluently, and if he/she fails to comply therewith, he/she is required to launch a ball gun at that time without stopping the fear after the beginning of the year. However, if the first-time disease whose work experience was 2 months has passed at that time, he/she is at fault of misunderstanding the victim who continued to have "water" at the wind, leading him/her to a fluence, launchings a ball gun, or dies, if he/she is at fault.

Article 750 of the Civil Code, Article 2 of the State Compensation Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Domin, Attorney Park Jae-young, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Kim Jong-sub et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellee-appellant

Korea

Seoul High Court Decision 84Na2040 delivered on September 28, 1984

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. The court that has been remanded or transferred to the Supreme Court under Article 406(2) of the Civil Procedure Act provides that the court shall belong to the factual and legal judgment based on the grounds for reversal of the court of final appeal, and Article 7-2 of the Court Organization Act provides the same purport, and it is also the theory of the lawsuit that there are judicial precedents on party members in the theory of lawsuit

2. According to the records, this case's case's case's case's accident was occurred at 9:00 p.m. 05 minutes at night while the non-party moves in the vicinity of the steel network in the military unit, and the accident occurred at 9:00 p.m. at night, and it was hard to identify at night, and the victim discovered and was able to find the victim who was approaching 20 meters at 20 meters in the front direction, but the victim did not respond to this and went up to 4 meters in the front direction, so the above victim's accident was launched at 16th class guns in the front direction, barring special circumstances, and even though it was difficult to view that the non-party was negligent by the non-party who started the accident, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to negligence under the State Compensation Act on the premise that the non-party was negligent in the part of the non-party, and thus, reversed the judgment of the court below.

3. The court below's decision to which the case was remanded shall be examined through a new examination of evidence, explain in detail the surrounding situation of the military unit, weather condition at the time, post-time and work experience of night soldiers, the victim's access to the military unit at night and the situation of the victim's movement at the time, and then determined that the non-party to the sentry's disease's failure to comply with the "man's visit" as soon as ordinary education was received, and if the person was approaching the military unit without a stop after the rocketing, the person's first work experience should launch ball cartridges at the same time without hearing "number" at the wind, and it cannot be determined that the court below's negligence did not conflict with the court below's decision to find that the court below's decision did not err by misapprehending the legal principles as to "man's visit tape" as the victim's access to the military unit, and that there was no error in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to the rejection of a new statement of evidence. The court below's decision to reverse the court below's decision.

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

Justices Jeon Soo-hee (Presiding Justice)