Guide to State Compensation Claims: Requirements and Responsible Parties

Based on 83 consultation cases · Updated October 4, 2026 · Translated from the Korean original.

If you suffer harm because of an official’s unlawful conduct in the performance of official duties or a defect in the installation or management of a public facility, you may claim compensation from the state or a local government. However, a breach of official duty, a lack of safety in the public facility, and a causal connection to the harm must be established. Whether liability exists is determined by examining the circumstances at the time and whether the measures taken were appropriate.

People and public bodies → Injured person → Official or facility manager → State or local government → Harm linked to official conduct or a public facility → Was an official acting in duty or a public facility involved? → Yes → No → Was a protective duty breached, or did the facility lack ordinary safety? → Yes — Articles 2(1) or 5(1) → Did the breach or defect cause your harm? → A compensation claim may be available → These guide requirements are not established → Check circumstances and protective measures → Check the responsible entity and who bears costs → Check court options and any other-law limits → Consider safety for intended use, warnings, foreseeability, and measures taken → Responsibility may depend on the function, facility management, delegation, and costs → A court claim need not start at the review board; compensation covers harm with a causal link

Key points

The state or a local government may be liable for compensation if an official, while performing official duties, causes harm by violating laws or regulations intentionally or negligently (State Compensation Act, Article 2(1) (국가배상법 제2조 제1항)).
Compensation may be awarded if the official’s duty was intended to protect individuals’ safety and interests and there was an adequate causal connection between the breach of duty and the harm (Cases 4 and 12).
Whether a road, manhole, or other public facility is defective is assessed by considering whether it lacked the safety ordinarily required for its intended use and whether the manager took protective measures proportionate to the danger (State Compensation Act, Article 5(1) (국가배상법 제5조 제1항); Cases 7, 11, and 18).
If temporary measures, such as warning signs, were taken after a danger was reported, or if the accident was difficult to foresee or avoid, the mere existence of a defect in the facility does not establish a maintenance defect (Case 18).
Even where an official has discretion, failing to exercise that authority in the specific circumstances may constitute a breach of official duty if the failure was manifestly unreasonable (Case 4; Case 9).
The entity responsible for compensation may depend on which entity the administrative function belongs to and the applicable allocation of legal responsibility, including the agency that delegated the function, the entity managing the facility, and the entity bearing the costs (State Compensation Act, Article 6(1) (국가배상법 제6조 제1항); Cases 5 and 7).
Even if a service member or other covered person is injured in the line of duty, a claim for state compensation may not be restricted if compensation is unavailable under other laws. A social service agent is not a service member under the State Compensation Act solely by virtue of that status (proviso to Article 2(1) of the State Compensation Act (국가배상법 제2조 제1항 단서); Cases 8 and 23).
You may file a state compensation lawsuit in court without applying to the Compensation Review Board, and compensation is limited to harm for which a causal connection is established (State Compensation Act, Article 9 (국가배상법 제9조); Cases 11 and 25).

Frequently asked questions

Q. Can I receive state compensation if I was injured because a manhole cover was missing from the road?

A manhole may qualify as a public facility. You may claim compensation if the evidence shows a defect in its maintenance and a causal relationship between that defect and your injury. Relevant factors include whether the cover was missing, whether lighting or warning signs were present, whether the manager knew or could have known of the danger, and whether you were injured because of the defect.

Case 11, Case 18

Q. Will the state pay compensation if a roadside slope collapses during heavy rain and causes an accident on the road?

The fact that there was heavy rain does not, by itself, establish that the road was defective in its maintenance. The circumstances must be assessed in detail, including whether the defect could have been remedied—for example, by installing drainage channels or protective structures—yet was left unaddressed, taking into account the road’s design and location, how it was used, and other relevant factors.

Case 7

Q. Which agency should I claim against if an accident is caused by a malfunctioning traffic signal?

The entity responsible for compensation may depend on which entity is legally responsible for the installation and management of the traffic signal. One case sets out the principle that delegating management authority to another agency does not change which entity the underlying administrative function belongs to. You should therefore check the delegation of installation and management authority and who bears the costs.

Case 5

Q. Can I receive compensation if inadequate fire inspections caused greater fire damage?

You should consider whether the fire officials’ duties were intended to protect the life, person, or property of individual members of the public; whether their breach of duty was so serious that it lacked objective justification; and whether there was an adequate causal connection between the breach and the harm. Even when an authority has discretion, failing to exercise it in the circumstances may be unlawful if the failure was manifestly unreasonable.

Case 4

Q. Can I claim compensation from the state if a third party is injured by a police pursuit or the use of a firearm?

A police pursuit may be considered unlawful if there are special circumstances showing that it was unnecessary for the purpose of the officers’ duties, or that its commencement, continuation, or manner was unreasonable in light of the specific risks that could have been anticipated. The use of a firearm is assessed in light of factors such as the type of crime, the urgency of the threat, the degree of resistance, and how the firearm was used. Stricter standards apply to handguns, which pose a significant risk of injuring people.

Case 3, Case 20

Q. Can the state be held liable if the police failed to isolate a dangerous person or a correctional institution failed to prevent an inmate’s suicide?

You should consider whether the police breached a duty to protect someone, or whether a correctional institution breached its duty to supervise or provide treatment, and whether the failure to act was manifestly unreasonable in light of the specific risk. Liability is not established solely because a suicide or crime occurred; it is also important whether the risk could have been foreseen at the time and what measures were actually taken.

Case 9, Case 22

Q. Can someone injured during military service not claim state compensation?

A claim for state compensation may be restricted when a service member or other covered person is injured in the line of duty and is eligible for compensation under other laws, such as an accident-compensation payment or pension. By contrast, a claim may be available if the person does not qualify for a disability grade or other accident compensation. One case also held that a social service agent is not a service member for purposes of this restriction unless serving in the military.

Case 8, Case 23

Q. Must I apply to the Compensation Review Board before filing a lawsuit in court?

No. According to a case, you may file a state compensation lawsuit in court without first applying to the Compensation Review Board. If you do apply to the Board, you may seek a reconsideration or file a lawsuit if you disagree with its decision or the amount of compensation.

Case 11, Case 16

Q. If I had to close my business because of an unlawful government action, can I also receive compensation for losses resulting from the closure?

Only harm causally connected to the unlawful performance of official duties is eligible for compensation. In a case where incorrect provision of tax-delinquency information damaged a person’s credit or reputation, emotional harm was recognized. However, the causal connection between that information and the person’s business closure and lost income was considered difficult to establish.

Case 25

Relevant laws

State Compensation Act, Article 2(1) and (2) (국가배상법 제2조 제1항·제2항)
State Compensation Act, Article 5(1) (국가배상법 제5조 제1항)
State Compensation Act, Article 6(1) (국가배상법 제6조 제1항)
State Compensation Act, Article 8 (국가배상법 제8조)
State Compensation Act, Article 9 (국가배상법 제9조)
State Compensation Act, Article 10 (국가배상법 제10조)
Constitution of the Republic of Korea, Article 29(1) and (2) (대한민국헌법 제29조 제1항·제2항)
Civil Act, Article 750 (민법 제750조)
Civil Act, Article 765 (민법 제765조)
Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers, Article 4(1) (경찰관직무집행법 제4조 제1항)
Act on the Performance of Duties by Police Officers, Article 10-4(1) (경찰관직무집행법 제10조의4 제1항)
Act on Liability for Fire Caused by Negligence, Articles 1, 2, and 3 (실화책임에 관한 법률 제1조·제2조·제3조)
Road Traffic Act, Article 3(1) (도로교통법 제3조 제1항)
Enforcement Decree of the Road Traffic Act, Article 86(1)(1) (도로교통법 시행령 제86조 제1항 제1호)
Enforcement Decree of the Seal Certificate Act, Articles 7 and 13 (인감증명법 시행령 제7조·제13조)

Watch out for

Compensation is not automatically available merely because an official made a mistake or a public facility had a defect. You must also establish a causal connection between the unlawfulness, negligence, or maintenance defect and the harm.
A public facility is not required to be flawless; it must have the level of safety generally expected under social norms. When the danger became known and whether any temporary measures were appropriate may also affect the determination.
State liability may depend on whether an official’s duty was intended solely to serve the public interest generally or also to protect the safety and interests of individuals.
Whether compensation restrictions apply to service members and other covered persons may depend not only on whether the injury was related to official duties but also on whether compensation is available under other laws. The individual circumstances should be checked.

A Blade in the Temple of Justice: Is the State Liable for Courtroom Violence?

Source cases

This guide was compiled by AI from the following Korea Legal Aid Corporation consultation cases (in Korean).

This guide is general legal information about Korean law, not legal advice for your situation. For a specific case, consult a lawyer or the Korea Legal Aid Corporation (call 132 in Korea).