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

1. The reasons why the court should explain this part of the liability for damages are as stated in the corresponding part of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing it as it is by the text of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. In addition to the matters stated below within the scope of liability for damages, each corresponding item of the Schedule of Calculation of Compensation for Damages shall be as follows, and in principle, the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but less than the last month and less than KRW 1 shall be discarded.

The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be based on the reduction rate of 5/12 percent per month to deduct the interim interest.

In addition, it is rejected that the parties' arguments are not stated separately.

In full view of the purport of the argument in the evidence Nos. 4 and 19 as a whole, the Plaintiff established the Gadi Private Teaching Institute from December 17, 1993 to November 2, 2006, and worked as an instructor in the course of operating the Gadi Institute. On July 7, 2004, the Plaintiff was working as an instructor until the accident occurred, and the Plaintiff acquired business income equivalent to KRW 39,720,000 from December 39, 2009.

According to the above facts, it is reasonable to view that the Plaintiff could have earned the income of education experts and a considerable amount of related position in the pertinent career. As such, the Plaintiff’s income forming the basis of lost income should be applied to KRW 2,531,33 of the month, which is the monthly wage for the number of years of continuous employment, the annual special pay, the number of hours of work and the number of workers classification, and the statistics of the number of women in the relevant position, which is the statistics of the total number of women in the employment relationship, on the 2,531,533 of the report on the fact-finding survey of employment by type of employment in 2010, which was issued by the Ministry of Employment and Labor near the instant accident.

3. The Plaintiff should set the Plaintiff’s maximum working age as 65 years in light of the retirement age of public educational officials.