|
[1] The content of duty in office and the standard for determining whether a casual relation exists, in a case where the State or local governments shall bear liability resulting from the public officials' breach of duty in office
[2] The case holding that there is no the casual relation between breach of duty in office which is the failure to take measures by public officials of the local government to be taken under the Food Sanitation Act and the resulting death, in a case where female employees, who were living enforced with a prostitution and confined in an entertainment facilities, could not escape when a fire broke out and as a result, they died due to suffocation of the toxic gas
[3] The case where the fire officer' breach of duty in office satisfies the element of unlawfulness provided by Article 2 of the State Compensation Act, and the requirement that the fire officer' failure to exercise his authority left to his own discretion establishes the breach of duty in office and as a result of the unlawfulness
[4] The case holding that there is a casual relation between the fire officer' breach of duty in office which is the failure to order improvement under the former Fire Services Act against such entertainment facilities before the fire and the resulting death, in a case where female employees, who were living enforced with a prostitution and confined in an entertainment facilities, could not escape when a fire broke out and as a result, they died due to suffocation of the toxic gas
|
