[손해배상청구사건][하집1986(3),102]
(a) Other party to ratification of an act of unauthorized Representation;
B. Whether a married wife may claim the right to claim damages due to a traffic accident of her husband
A. Since the ratification of an act of unauthorized representation takes effect when the declaration of intention has been made to the unauthorized representative or to the other party, it shall not be deemed that the act of unauthorized representation has ratified the act of unauthorized representation as the fact that the unauthorized representative or the other party has filed a lawsuit of claiming the return of agreed amount and withdrawn it.
B. In a case where the wife was unable to check the husband's behavior and the husband died as a traffic accident while living in the factory and living in the factory, if the husband died as a traffic accident, the wife's assertion of inheritance right to claim damages caused by the traffic accident cannot be deemed null and void in violation of public order and good morals.
Articles 103 and 132 of the Civil Act
Plaintiff 1 and one other
Requesting Transport Corporation
Busan District Court (85 Gohap2157)
From March 27, 1984 to the full payment system, the part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the amount equivalent to five percent per annum against the defendant among the original judgment against the defendant shall be revoked, and the plaintiffs' claims against the part shall be dismissed.
The defendant's remaining appeal is dismissed.
All the costs of lawsuit shall be divided into two parts of the first and second instances, and one of them shall be the plaintiffs, and the remainder shall be the defendant's each.
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 12,434,372 won, 11,434,372 won to the plaintiff 2, and 5% per annum from March 27, 1984 to the delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, and 25% per annum from the next day to the full payment date.
The judgment and declaration of provisional execution that the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant;
The part against the defendant in the original judgment shall be revoked.
All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
All the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs in the first and second instances.
1. Occurrence of liability for damages;
In full view of the purport of the argument in the statement No. 1-2, No. 3, and No. 5-3 through No. 10, without dispute, Nonparty 1, the driver belonging to the defendant, at around March 26, 1984, operated a business taxi owned by the defendant (vehicle number omitted) on March 26, 1984, and operated a sexual energy front way located in Daegu-dong, Daegu-gu along the road at a speed of about 40 kilometers per hour with the second line at the right side of the road at the speed of about 40 kilometers in the same direction. In such cases, Nonparty 1, who is the driver belonging to the defendant, was unable to take necessary measures to reduce the collision between the plaintiff and the second driver's office and the second driver's office of the second driver's office of the second driver's office, but was unable to take necessary measures to reduce the collision between the second driver's and the second driver's office of the second driver's office and the second driver's office of the second driver's office.
The defendant's assertion that the above plaintiff 1 had no effect on the non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's right to know about the non-party 1's whereabouts and that the non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's non-party 1's non-party 2's non-party 1's.
Meanwhile, according to the above facts and each evidence, it is acknowledged that, as the deceased non-party 2, there is a vehicle passing at night more than 11 p.m., without examining whether there is a vehicle passing at night, and there is a situation before and after the accident occurred, the negligence of Non-party 2 is concurrent as a cause for the occurrence of the accident and the extension of damages. However, the degree of negligence alone does not constitute the defendant's exemption from liability, so the negligence of Non-party 2 should be considered to be calculated to the extent that the negligence of Non-party 2 is 40 percent.
2. Scope of damages.
A. The deceased non-party 2's lost income
(2) Comprehensively taking account of all the arguments set forth in Gap evidence 1-1-2, Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 6 and Eul evidence 7, 2 non-party 1-6 (the average remaining life of 37 years and 8 months old at the time of this accident x 30.82 years old, the daily wage as of March 1984 as of the end of 1984 can be acknowledged as 6,00 won per day, 7,200 won per 1-60, 1985, 200 won per month, 1-6, 300 won per month, 500 won per annum, 1-6, 300 won per annum, 1-6, 300 won per month, 1-6, 205 won per month, 60 days per month, 30 days per month, and 50 days per month, 200 or less per annum, and 20-15 days per month, respectively.
(b) consolation money;
Since the deceased non-party 2 was killed as a result of the accident in this case, it is easy in light of the empirical rule to recognize that the plaintiffs who are his wife's status as well as themselves have suffered considerable mental suffering. Thus, the defendant has a duty to pay the defendant with money. Thus, considering the circumstance and result of the accident in this case, the degree of negligence of the non-party 2, the plaintiffs' age, property level, and all other circumstances shown in the pleadings in this case such as the status of the accident in this case, the defendant should pay 1,00,000 won as consolation money and 300,000 won for each of them to the non-party 2.
(c) Inheritance relationship;
According to the above recognition, the damages caused by the non-party 2's accident are 12,01,891 won (11,001,891 +1,000,000) by combining property losses and consolation money. The damages caused by the non-party 2's accident were jointly inherited by the non-party 2's claim for damages (the plaintiff 2 is the property heir and the family heir). If the damages are divided according to their respective shares of inheritance, the plaintiffs' share is 6,00,945 won (12,01,891 x 1/2).
3. Conclusion
Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiffs the above shares of inheritance and damages for delay at the rate of 5% per annum from March 27, 1984 to the full payment system as claimed by the plaintiffs after the date of the accident, each of the above shares of inheritance and consolation money (6,00,945 +30,000) and each of the above shares of inheritance and consolation money (the part against the defendant who ordered payment in excess of the above authorized amount in the original judgment is unfair, and the plaintiffs are bound to pay damages for delay at the rate of 25% per annum per annum from the day after the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case to the date of full payment, but the defendant is deemed to have a reasonable ground for dispute over the existence and scope of the liability for damages. Thus, the claim of this case of this case is justified within the above recognized limit, and the part against the defendant who ordered payment in excess of the above authorized amount in the original judgment is revoked, and the remaining part of the defendant's appeal is dismissed by applying Article 96 of the Civil Procedure Act.
Judges Cho Jong-soo (Presiding Judge)