A. Whether the full loss of labor ability and the reduction of average female life

(b) Methods of claiming compensation for damages in cases where the loss of the disbursement of one's own profit or medical expenses or nursing expenses continues to occur in the future;

(c) Whether measures are taken which do not take the above monthly salary as substitute employment cost in calculating the actual income of the person who was employed by the foundation before the accident but who operates the two-points at the time of the accident (affirmative);

A. The decision of the court below that should have an impact on the average life expectancy should be judged individually from the medical point of view according to the specific degree and content of the postary gift. In the present where medical science developed, it cannot be readily concluded that the remaining life of the plaintiff who lost his/her labor ability by 100% cannot be determined only when he/she completely loses his/her labor ability. Therefore, the decision of the court below that recognized that the remaining life of the plaintiff who lost his/her labor ability by 100% was reduced to 21 years compared to the average life of 33.90 years of our age by the physical examination result,

(b) In cases of loss of profits that can be obtained in the future due to the aftermath disability of an injury inflicted by a tort or loss of continuing medical expenses or nursing expenses in the future, a claim for compensation for such damage may be claimed from the regular fund, and a claim for the payment of the current price after deducting the intermediate interest, may be made in a lump sum.

(c) Even if the plaintiff was employed as a foundation before commencing his/her two uniforms, and received a fixed amount of wages each month at the time of the accident, as long as he/she had operated his/her two uniforms, the plaintiff's alternative employment expenses should be determined by taking into account his/her ability to operate businesses other than technical ability as a foundation and scope of activities, so the amount of the above wages should not be considered as the substitute employment expenses of the plaintiff.

Articles 763 and 393 of the Civil Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 87Meu2240 Decided January 12, 198 (Gong198,402) (Gong198,402) 90Meu23325 Decided October 30, 1990 (Gong1990,2415). Supreme Court Decision 68Da92 Decided March 5, 1968, Supreme Court Decision 68Da171 Decided April 23, 1968 (Gong198,402) Decided January 12, 198

Plaintiff

Lee Sung-hoon (Attorney So-young, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 90Na7441 delivered on July 4, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal No. 1 are examined.

In the end, the issue of how to affect the average life expectancy of the aftermath of injury shall be determined individually from the medical point of view according to the specific degree and content of the aftermath of injury (see Supreme Court Decision 87Meu2240, Jan. 12, 198), and in the present where medical science develops highly, it is difficult to readily conclude that only once it is impossible to survive even if it completely loses labor ability.

In the above purport, the court below is justified in finding that the plaintiff was a physically healthy male who was 36 years old at the time of the accident due to the result of the physical appraisal entrustment to the director of the 33.90-year school affiliated with the medical department of the court of first instance. The plaintiff was a physically healthy male who was 36 years old at the time of the accident. In the status of the completion of all the treatment of the injury caused by the accident in this case, the physical disability in the improvement of the lower half and the lower half-year disability will remain, and the labor ability would be lost by 100 percent and the remaining life of the plaintiff would be reduced by 21 years compared to the average life of the male in Korea who was 3.90 years old, and there is no error of incomplete deliberation or

The evidence No. 4-1, No. 4-2 of the lawsuit is an examination of the so-called number of years available for survival of patients in a state between plant persons due to two damage, and thus, it cannot be viewed as an appropriate material to determine future life of the plaintiff. The argument is groundless.

The grounds of appeal No. 2 are examined.

In the event of loss of future profit from the aftermath of injury caused by tort or loss of continuing medical expenses or nursing expenses in the future, a claim for compensation for such damage may be filed with a fixed-term fund, and it may be claimed by deducting the intermediate interest and calculating the present price (see Supreme Court Decision 68Da92 delivered on March 5, 1968; Supreme Court Decision 68Da171 delivered on April 23, 1968; Supreme Court Decision 87Da2240 delivered on January 12, 198). Thus, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles of compensation for damage, as in the theory of lawsuit, by citing the plaintiff's claim that the regular amount should be paid in a lump sum without ordering the payment of the regular amount, as it is, instead of citing the plaintiff's claim that the regular amount should be paid in a lump sum. The arguments are groundless.

The grounds of appeal No. 3 are examined.

In light of the records, we examine the quoted evidence of the judgment below in light of the records. The plaintiff's alternative employment cost is 700,000 won per month, and it cannot be found that there was an error of incomplete deliberation or a violation of the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence in the measures of the court below that calculated the lost profit.

Even if the plaintiff was employed as a foundation before opening his/her two-way stores, such as theory, and received 600,000 won monthly wage at the time of the accident in this case, insofar as he/she was operating his/her two-way points at the time of the accident in this case, the plaintiff's alternative employment expenses should be determined by considering the ability and scope of activities related to the business operation in addition to his/her technical ability as a foundation foundation, so the above wage amount is not attributable to the failure of the plaintiff's substitute employment expenses. There is

Therefore, the appeal is 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.

Justices Park Yong-dong (Presiding Justice)