logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 2017.11.29 2015다27125
손해배상(기)
Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Reasons

1. The damages to be compensated for tort or nonperformance are definitely incurred. As such, in a case where the injured party or creditor bears certain obligations against a third party due to tort or nonperformance, etc., the burden of the obligation to seek compensation identical to the other party’s obligation is final and conclusive, and thus, it should be determined objectively and reasonably in light of social norms, in order to seek the same compensation as the other party’s obligation. Whether such obligation is deemed to have been actually suffered as the actual burden is final and conclusive.

[See Supreme Court Decisions 92Da2948, Nov. 27, 1992; 2010Da107682, Jul. 26, 2013; 2010Da107699, etc.] Furthermore, Article 766(1) of the Civil Act provides that a claim for damages due to a tort shall expire if it is not exercised for three years from the date the victim or his/her legal representative becomes aware of the damage and of the tortfeasor.

The term "date when the victim becomes aware of the damage and the perpetrator" refers to the date when the victim or his/her legal representative actually and specifically perceived the damage and the perpetrator, and whether the victim, etc. is deemed to have actually and specifically perceived the facts of the requirements for the tort should be reasonably acknowledged in consideration of various objective circumstances of the individual case and circumstances in which the claim for damages is practically possible (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 88Meu32371, Sept. 26, 1989; 2000Da22249, Jun. 28, 2002). The burden of proving the date when the damage became aware of the damage lies in a person who claims the benefit arising from the expiration of the statute

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da17553, Jul. 12, 2013). In particular, in the case of damage claim arising from a tort at an interval of time between a harmful act and the occurrence of actual damage, the starting point of the statute of limitations is the starting point.

arrow