The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 14,625,924 won with an annual interest rate of 5 percent from December 20, 1979 to full payment.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit shall be three parts and one of them shall be borne by the plaintiff, and the other two by the defendant.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The judgment that the lawsuit costs shall be borne by the defendant and provisional execution declaration

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of 6,299,31 won and the amount at the rate of 5 percent per annum from March 1, 1981 to the full payment.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant in both the first and second trials and a declaration of provisional execution.

According to the results of the examination of criminal records by the court below, the plaintiff could be found to have been injured by the injury, such as preferential retirement and opening frame, etc. on the front and rear night of the (vehicle number omitted) Posi-si operated by the non-party 1 belonging to the defendant company while crossinging the road on the road before Jung-gu, Jung-gu, Incheon Metropolitan City on December 20, 1979. Thus, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiff for the damages caused to the plaintiff due to the above accident caused by the above operation in accordance with Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act.

However, in light of the above facts and records No. 1, No. 2 and No. 1 to No. 3 (Simplified Statements) of the court below, the plaintiff was unable to reach an agreement with the defendant 2 on the remaining 9 days of death. In light of the above facts and records No. 2, the plaintiff continued to pay 1,50,000 won to the plaintiff as compensation for damages, on the ground that the plaintiff was unable to reach an agreement with the defendant 2 on the remaining 9 days of death due to the plaintiff's non-indicted No. 2's non-indicted No. 4 (Evidence No. 9) as well as the above facts and records No. 1 to the court below's non-indicted No. 2's non-indicted No. 9 (Evidence No. 2) for the first time of death, and the remaining part of the testimony No. 9 were no different from the above facts and evidence No. 1 to the contrary, and thus, the plaintiff's testimony No. 2 as to the above facts and evidence No. 4 of the above agreement. 5 months of injury. .

Therefore, the defendant is still liable for compensating for damages caused by the above accident. Meanwhile, according to the result of the examination of criminal records by the court below, it is recognized that the plaintiff was negligent in crossinging the road without using the crosswalk, and the degree of negligence by the plaintiff is difficult to view that the above degree of negligence by the plaintiff is the degree of exemption from the above liability of the defendant, but it is difficult to determine the scope of the above liability of the defendant

2. Calculation of damages;

(A) passive damages

According to the evidence No. 1 (No. 1) and evidence No. 3 (Simplified Life Table) without dispute, the plaintiff was born on January 2, 1935, and the life expectancy remaining 44 years old at the time of this accident and 31 years old at that time. Thus, unless there are special circumstances, the plaintiff is presumed to be able to work at the workplace where he had been engaged at the time of this accident to the retirement age of 31 years old. Meanwhile, the plaintiff is 1 (construction price) of evidence No. 5 (No. 3) without dispute, and the evidence No. 2 ( Wage Ledger) of the court below's finding that the authenticity is formed by testimony No. 9 of the non-party 3 and the evidence No. 9 (Simplified Life Table) of the court below, and the plaintiff was unable to work at the end of 0 months after the date of this accident until the date of the above physical appraisal of the non-party 3 and 2's testimony, and the plaintiff was employed by the non-party 2 as an urban cargo worker who lost the above physical condition of this case.

According to the above facts, the above plaintiff lost 129,200 won after deducting 70,800 won (5,900 x 48/100) due to the remaining amount of urban daily labor ability in 200,000 won from the time of the above accident until the end of September 1982, the treatment period of which expires from the time of the above accident, from the time of the above accident to the end of September, 1982, the total amount of 200,00 won for the above cargo discharge, and from the time of the age of 55 to the time of the above plaintiff's discharge, it is clear that the above amount is 129,200 won after deducting 70,80 won (5,900 x 405,000 won for the above time from the time of the accident to the time of 551 months x 305,000 won (the above amount is calculated as 309,509,0000 won) per annum 294.7.54.

(b) Treatment costs;

In full view of the statement of evidence Nos. 6 (Account Statement) and the results of the physical examination of the sexual scrap metal and the whole purport of the oral argument, the plaintiff discharged from the above Epic surgery to the above Epic surgery on December 2, 1981, and was hospitalized in the above Epic surgery on January 24, 1982, and discharged from the above Epic surgery to the above Epic surgery on January 24, 1982, the above Epic surgery cost of 2,864,000 won for the above Epic surgery. In order to continue to treat the above conditions due to the accident, the plaintiff needs to continuously conduct a radiation treatment for six months in the next six months, and need to undergo a surgical medical treatment due to the mouth of the right stimul, and the plaintiff cannot be found to have any other facts contrary to the Epic surgery cost of 1,48,000 won and there is no difference in the appraisal cost of 90 Do090.

Therefore, the sum of the already incurred medical expenses and the future medical expenses is KRW 5,862,00.

(C) Negligence offsetting, etc.

Therefore, property losses suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident are 20,632,405 won (14,770,405 + 5,862,00 won) including the above recognized amount, and as above, it is reasonable to determine the amount to be compensated for the plaintiff as 16,505,924 won, which is 80% of the amount to be compensated for the plaintiff. Meanwhile, in light of the above evidence Nos. 1 and 2-1 through 3 as above, it is reasonable to determine the amount to be compensated for the plaintiff as 16,505 won, 1,500 won, 2050 won, 40, 500 won, 500 won, 500 won, 500 won, 1980 won, 500 won, 1980 won, 500 won, 1980 won, 405% of the above amount to be compensated for the plaintiff's above amount to be paid to the plaintiff.

(D) The plaintiffs' consolation money

Since the plaintiff can be easily recognized in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered significant mental pain by suffering injuries as the above recognition of the accident, such as the above recognition of the accident, and the defendant has a duty to pay consolation money in money. Furthermore, in relation to the amount, the amount of consolation money that the defendant is liable for compensation should be determined at KRW 800,000, considering all circumstances shown in the arguments in this case, such as the plaintiff's age, family relation, property, and educational degree recognized by various evidences mentioned above, and the degree of injury and negligence of the plaintiff in this case.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 14,625,924 (property damage + KRW 13,825,924 + KRW 800,000) and the damages for delay under the Civil Act at the rate of five percent per annum from December 20, 1979, which is the date on which the main accident occurred, to the date on which the main accident occurred. Thus, the plaintiff's claim in the main lawsuit is reasonable within the scope of the above recognition, and the others are justified, and the remainder is dismissed. Since part of the original judgment with different conclusions is unfair, the original judgment is modified as stated in the order, and as to the cost of the lawsuit, Article 96, 9, and Article 92 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be applied to the declaration of provisional execution by Article 199 of the same Act.

Judges Kim Jong-Un(Presiding Judge)