(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.26 2017나65403

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.26 2017나65403

손해배상(자)

Text

1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff KRW 270,262,582 as well as to the plaintiff on August 2014.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is that the Plaintiff’s assertion of negligence is insufficient. The court rejected each description and image of evidence Nos. 12 and 13 (including paper numbers) which are insufficient to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s assertion of negligence, and it is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the use of or addition to some of the following matters. As such, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

Part 3 through 9 of the judgment of the first instance court shall be followed as follows.

On the other hand, the plaintiff acquired the user license on February 11, 1997 and operated the user's trade name "E" for eight years from May 26, 2006 to the time of the accident in this case, and obtained an average of at least 4,000 won per month. In light of the plaintiff's career, management ability, etc., the plaintiff argues that the future loss amount should be calculated on the basis of the 3,643,00 won per month, which is the statistical income of men in the report on the actual employment by type of employment in 2016.

The amount of lost income of a victim who has earned a certain amount of income at the time of a tort shall be calculated based on objective and reasonable data after determining the amount of income actually earned by the victim at the time of the accident. In such cases, when the victim has reported to the tax authority, the amount of reported income shall be deemed the amount of income at the time of the accident.

However, if the reported amount of income is deemed considerably low in light of the victim's occupation, age, career, etc., only the reported amount of income cannot be deemed the amount of income at the time of the victim's accident, but in such a case, the victim actually earned such amount of income at the time of the accident in order to recognize the lost income based on the daily wage or more

It was possible to obtain such income amount.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-대법원 2016. 6. 28. 선고 2015다23024 판결

-서울중앙지방법원 2018.03.27 2017나43830

-울산지방법원 2019.05.30 2018나21630

-대전지방법원 2016.01.14 2015나104853

-창원지방법원 2016.08.25 2016나52238