logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1968. 6. 18. 선고 68다602 판결
[손해배상][집16(2)민,150]
Main Issues

(a) The nature of the soldier’s benefits as well as the survivor’s benefits as prescribed in Article 18(1) of the Military Aid Allowances Act; and

(b) Relationship between the soldier’s benefits under the provisions of the death allowance and the bereaved family’s pension under the provisions of Article 18(1) of the Military Relief Benefits Act and the claim for consolation money under the State Compensation Act; and

Summary of Judgment

Benefits under the Military Death Benefits Regulations (Abolition) or survivor's pension paid under the Military Aid Benefits Act (Abolition) is of the nature of consolation money.

[Reference Provisions]

Article 18(1) of the Military Aid Benefits Act; Article 1 of the Military Aid Benefits Act; Article 2(1) of the State Compensation Act; Article 2 of the State Compensation Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 67Da2417 Decided December 12, 1967

Plaintiff-Appellee

Plaintiff 1 and three others

Defendant-Appellant

Korea

Judgment of the lower court

Seoul High Court Decision 68Na44 decided March 8, 1968, Seoul High Court Decision 68Na44 decided March 8, 1968

Text

(1) The part of the lower judgment against the Defendant regarding the claim for consolation money is reversed, and that part is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

(2) The remaining appeals except for the part above are dismissed, and the costs of appeal against this part are assessed against the defendant.

Reasons

The grounds of appeal by the defendant litigant are examined.

It is essential to say that all the above amount of consolation money paid by the State to the deceased's bereaved family members under Article 18 (1) of the Military Aid Benefit Act has the nature of compensation for the deceased's death (see Supreme Court Decision 67Da2417, Dec. 26, 1967). However, the court below decided as follows with respect to the claim of consolation money for the death of the deceased (the plaintiff's son) due to traffic accident in this case, and the death of the deceased (the plaintiff's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's Professor, the deceased's occupation, age, the deceased's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's Professor's Professor's Professor's Professor's Professor's Professor's Professor's Professor's remaining amount of consolation money for the plaintiff's death.

This decision is consistent with the opinions of the involved judges.

The judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) of the Red Net Sheet

arrow
본문참조조문
기타문서