1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except where the defendant added a "additional Judgment" as to the argument emphasized or added by the court of first instance, and therefore, it is identical to the part of the reasoning of the court of first instance. Thus, it is citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Additional determination

A. The Defendant’s assertion that the Plaintiff had been performing the power distribution major work rather than the power distribution activation major work at the time of the instant accident. The said occupation ought to be deemed to be the maximum working age due to the difficulty of duties. Even if the Plaintiff’s maximum working age is recognized to be up to 60 years of age, the Plaintiff’s occupation should be deemed to be a internal major, not a power distribution major, from the time when he turns 50 to the age of 60.

In addition, the amount of consolation money recognized by the first instance court is excessively excessive in light of the circumstances of the accident in this case.

B. Determination 1) According to each of the items stated in Gap evidence Nos. 2 and 8 and the purport of the entire arguments and arguments, the plaintiff’s statistical income is reasonable to be calculated on the basis of the main sentence for power distribution activation. The plaintiff’s statistical income cannot be deemed different solely on the ground that the plaintiff performed the power distribution major work at the time of the accident in this case. Thus, the defendant’s assertion is rejected. 2) When the court recognizes the maximum working age that serves as the basis for calculating lost income, it may determine the maximum working age based on the empirical rule by examining all of the circumstances such as the population of workers by age, employment rate or labor participation rate by age, working conditions by job type and retirement age limit in addition to the social and economic conditions such as the average remaining life, economic level, employment conditions, and employment conditions, etc. of the people, and derive the presumed maximum working age in light of the victim’s age, occupation, work experience, health conditions

(Supreme Court Decision 2018Da248909 Decided February 21, 2019 and Supreme Court Decision 2009Da100920 Decided May 13, 201, etc.).