logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 부산지방법원 2015.06.10 2015가단9345
손해배상(기)
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Determination as to the cause of claim

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows: (a) the Plaintiff asserts the cause of the instant claim.

The plaintiff filed a complaint with the Busan District Court as a witness at the examination date of the case No. 2011Gabu309010, which made C as the defendant at the Seo organization Police Station.

However, the Defendant, a police officer belonging to the above police station who investigated the above accusation case, submitted objective and reliable evidence to prove C’s suspicion of perjury, but did not recognize all the above evidence for unjust purposes from the beginning, and caused mental pain to the Plaintiff by intentionally making an unfair and biased investigation in violation of Article 5(1) of the Criminal Investigation Rule, such as not recognizing all the above evidence.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the consolation money of KRW 20,000,100 due to the above unlawful act, and damages for delay.

B. Prevention, suppression, and investigation of the judgment crime constitutes a police officer’s duty, and the specific contents and methods of the police officer’s act are delegated to a police officer’s reasonable discretion based on his/her professional judgment. Thus, in cases where the police officer performed duties to suppress and investigate the crime according to the judgment that it is appropriate measures within the scope of human and material capacity under a specific situation, taking into account the purport and purpose of granting such authority to the police officer, the seriousness or extent of damage inflicted on the people or citizens due to the police officer’s failure to take other measures, and whether the police officer is likely to take measures to avoid the result by predicting such result, the requirements for the State’s liability, on the ground of omission, unless it is deemed that such act loses objective legitimacy and is clearly unreasonable.

arrow