1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiff corresponding to the money ordered to be paid in addition to the following shall be revoked.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the part resulting in appeal under Paragraph 2 below, and thus, it is acceptable to accept this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts to be dried;

(a) in Part 2 of the judgment of the first instance court, the term “victim” in Part 14 shall be read as “the plaintiff”;

(b) third-party decision of the first instance court.

(1) subsection (1) shall be amended as follows:

"The loss of lost income equivalent to the monetary total assessment value of the operating capacity lost by the accident of this case" is 21,95,447 won calculated at the present price at the time of the accident of this case, based on the method of deducting intermediate interest at the rate of 5/12 per month, based on the facts of recognition and assessment as follows (A).

(A) Gender: Male and birth date, and age 1: The amount of actual income of a victim who had earned a certain amount of income at the time of the accident shall be calculated based on objective and reasonable data to determine the amount of income actually earned by the victim at the time of the accident (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 92Da37642, Feb. 23, 1993; 93Da37885, Sept. 30, 1994; 93Da37885, Sept. 30, 1994; 200Da3778885, Sept. 30, 200). If evidence of reliable actual income is not presented, the amount of actual income of the victim shall be calculated based on statistical income of the persons engaged in the occupation similar to the occupation that the victim had worked.

(See Supreme Court Decisions 2005Da16904 delivered on March 9, 2006, 2007Da52607 delivered on December 14, 2007, etc.). Based on the above legal principles, the above legal principles were examined as to the instant case, Gap evidence 8-2, 11, 21-1 through 4, 22-1, 22-2-1, and 22-1, 2-2, and the whole purport of the pleadings as to the fact-finding with respect to Samil Logistics Co., Ltd. by the court of first instance., the Plaintiff from August 197 to December 14, 2007.