Cases where liability is recognized as the manager of a local government's public structure due to an accident involving a long-term street;

Cases that recognized the responsibility of the local government as the manager of public structures due to an accident involving a long-term street tree.

Article 5(1) of the State Compensation Act, Article 758 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 and 2 others (Law Firm Gyeong, Attorneys Park Gyeong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellee)

Plaintiff

Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government (Attorney Park Sang-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Seoul Civil District Court Decision 92Na27460 delivered on March 23, 1993

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. Determination on the first ground for appeal by the defendant's attorney

According to the records, it is clear that the plaintiff had resolved the compensation in the lawsuit of this case, which is a lawsuit for compensation of damages under the State Compensation Act, there is no reason to discuss.

2. Determination on the ground of appeal No. 2

On July 20, 191, 12:15, the court below held that it is difficult for the defendant to take necessary measures such as 15 meters high and high and 15 meters high and 5 meters high and damaged the roof of the plaintiff-owned vehicle passed through the flooding area, and around that time, there is a high level of rain and storming danger, so the defendant, who is in charge of managing the roadside trees of the above road passing with many people and vehicles, is still using a long wind ground so that it is difficult for the defendant to take necessary measures such as 0 meters high and high and high and high and high and high and high and high level of 15 meters high and high and high level of 15 meters high and high and high level of 15 meters high and high and high level of 20 meters high and high level of 5 meters high and high level of 5 meters high and high level of 5 meters high and high level of ground of the above accident can be found to have been found to have been wide and long as the ground of the above accident occurred.

3. Determination on the ground of appeal No. 3

If the facts were duly determined by the court below, the court below did not consider the plaintiff's negligence or weather conditions at the time when the accident of this case occurred in determining the amount of damages that the defendant is liable to compensate for to the plaintiff, and did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on comparative negligence or causation, such as the theory of lawsuit, and therefore, there is no reason to interpret.

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

Justices Yoon-young (Presiding Justice)