[손해배상(자)][공1993.12.1.(957),3055]
Methods of calculating lost income of persons who engage in personal business;
In calculating the lost income of a person who runs a personal business, it may be calculated according to the ratio of the portion of profits generated by an individual contribution to his business income based on his business income as at the time of his accident, and the individual contribution to his business income may be calculated by deducting his personal, physical, and capital gains from his business income. If the amount of business income calculated by multiplying the total amount of income by the standard ratio of income under the Income Tax Act is based on the amount of business income calculated by multiplying the total amount of income, the income calculated by deducting his personal and physical expenses. Thus, the amount of the contribution made by the capital invested in the business should be deducted again from the amount of the business income, and the amount of contribution made by the invested capital as such shall be distinguished from the necessary expenses such as the rent of the store that was deducted in the course of his business income determination
Article 763 (Provisions of Civil Act)
[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law No. 455, Feb. 13, 1990) (Gong1990,628) (Law No. 1988, Jun. 28, 199)
[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant-appellee
Defendant-Appellant No. 10
Seoul High Court Decision 90Na3005 delivered on September 5, 1991
All appeals are dismissed.
The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.
We examine the grounds of appeal.
1. On the first ground for appeal
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined as follows: (a) comprehensively based on the evidences, that the defendant attended the Chungcheongnamnam University Dog-dong, held at around 20:0 on April 12, 198, 198, with Non-party 1, to drink 9 disease together at the main station in the large exhibition at around 24:00 on the same day; (b) around 02:00 on the next day, the above deceased was on board the port-based passenger car as indicated in his holding, and was driving the above car to the Geumsan-do-Eup at around 02:30 on the same day; and (c) caused the death of the deceased by drinking alcohol and night driving beyond the opposite line, and caused the death of the above deceased to the right-hand seat of the above vehicle, and determined as follows: (d) the defendant caused the death of the deceased at the front of the above vehicle by taking the front of the vehicle's body, and without giving rise to the death of the deceased at around 30:30 on the day.
In comparison with the records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are all acceptable, and there is no violation of rules of evidence, such as theory of lawsuit, or misapprehension of legal principles.
There is no reason to discuss this issue.
2. On the second ground for appeal
In calculating the lost income of a person who runs a personal business, it can be calculated according to the ratio of the portion of profits generated by his own contribution to his business income based on his business income as at the time of his accident, and the individual contribution to his business income may be calculated by deducting his personal, physical, and capital gains from his business income. If the amount of business income is calculated by multiplying the standard rate of income from his business income under the Income Tax Act, the income calculated by deducting his personal and physical expenses. Thus, the amount of the contribution made by the capital invested in the business should be deducted from the amount of the contribution made to the business, and the amount of the contribution made by the capital as such shall be distinguished from the necessary expenses such as the rent of the store that was leased in the course of his business income determination. Thus, it shall not be deemed a double-income deduction for the same reason (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 86Meu2455, Mar. 24, 198; 86Meu271, Mar. 14, 1989).
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, in calculating the lost income of the deceased from the accident of this case, the above 20 won was 150 won per annum of the above 30 won per annum of the deceased and 150 won per annum of the above 1987.4.27, 1987. 25 won per annum of the deceased and 20 won per annum of the above 30 won per annum of the above 196 won per annum of the deceased (the above 196 won per annum of the deceased's total income of 153,579,826 won per annum of the above 1987. 30 won per annum of the above 196 won per annum of the deceased's total income of 151,207,983 won per annum of the above 196 won per annum of the deceased's total income of 30 won per annum of the above 196 won per annum of the deceased's business income of the above 1987 won per annum.
In light of the records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are acceptable, and there is no illegality in the rules of evidence, such as theory of lawsuit, or in the misapprehension of legal principles, and the party members pointing out the above facts shall not be allowed to deduct necessary expenses such as the rent of a store separately leased in addition to deducting the amount of capital gains contributed by the capital invested capital from the business income when calculating the lost earnings based on the degree of contribution of an individual entrepreneur based on the business income under the Income Tax Act. Thus, this case shall not be a precedent, unlike this case.
There is no reason to discuss this issue.
3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Kim Yong-sung (Presiding Justice)