2. If the victim of the traffic accident had already completed the vocational training course of the vocational training center, had already acquired the qualification as a technician, and has finished the training center’s completion, it would be clearly predicted that the victim would have accrued profits in calculating the amount of future lost income in the future.

The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.

With respect to No. 1:

A person who operates an automobile for himself as stipulated in Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act shall be liable for damages sustained by the passengers in the event that the passengers are injured due to the operation, unless the injury was caused by the intention or suicide of the passengers (see Supreme Court Decision 76Da538, Jul. 12, 197). Under the above opinion, the court below held that the defendant company has no evidence to prove that the injury was caused by the plaintiff 1, who is the passenger due to the operation of a high speed bus (vehicle registration No. 1 omitted) operated for his own interest, and held that there was no evidence to prove that the injury was caused by the plaintiff 1's intentional act or suicide, and it is just to determine that the plaintiffs are liable for damages sustained by the plaintiffs due to the injury of the plaintiff, who is the passenger, and it cannot be said that there was an error of law in the misapprehension of legal principles, such as the theory of lawsuit, and even if the injury was caused by the unilateral negligence of the non-party 2 (automobile registration No. 2 omitted).

With respect to Section 2:

According to the evidence of this case, the court below confirmed that the plaintiff 1 had been paid a monthly salary of KRW 150,000 to the Newdong Electronic Industries Company without delay after acquiring the qualifications for the 2-year vocational training technician at the time of the accident and completing the above training course as the 150,000 won for the monthly salary of KRW 150,00,00 for the company of this case, and it was reasonable that the plaintiff 1 had been paid a monthly salary of KRW 150,000 for the company of this case, based on the monthly salary of KRW 150,000 for the company of this case, the plaintiff 1 calculated the loss of future income of the plaintiff 1 based on the monthly salary of the above non-party of this case, and it cannot be said that there was no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the calculation of lost income, or by failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations or by failing to exhaust any evidence.

Therefore, this appeal is dismissed as without merit, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Dra-ro (Presiding Justice)