If the victim has obtained the name of his/her spouse or his/her father, a claim for damages equivalent to the opening expenses of the victim

Even if a victim suffers from an accident due to the aftermath of the injury caused by an accident and he/she receives the nursing of his/her parents or spouse, etc., the victim may claim compensation against the perpetrator on the ground that he/she suffered from a loss equivalent to the nursing expenses.

Article 763 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 81Meu737 Decided April 13, 1982, Supreme Court Decision 86Meu2366 Decided February 24, 1987

Plaintiff (Attorney Kim Young-won, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Attorney Kim Jong-sik, Justice Song-sik, Justice Song Jong-sik, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellant

Seoul High Court Decision 86Na2391 delivered on April 30, 1987

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, with respect to the plaintiff's claim for nursing expenses due to the tort of this case, the court below acknowledged that the plaintiff suffered damage from an adult male-party 2 working for urban daily work due to the accident of this case, since the accident of this case, in addition to permanent fishing, accident history, accident history, disability of judgment power, plan, forecast, motive formation disorder, emotional disorder, etc., he left, two adult male-party 2's nursing for 12 hours a day from the date of the accident of this case until the date of closing argument, and thereafter, the above opening of the above contents was required during the reduced life period. Accordingly, in light of the records, the court below determined that the plaintiff suffered damage of 87,971,354 won per day, an ordinary male-party 2 working for urban work. In light of the records, the judgment of the court below is just and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the recognition and opening of the above facts.

In addition, since future treatment expenses and long-term care expenses recognized by the court below as active damages against the plaintiff are separate damages unrelated to the nursing expenses recognized above, there is no reason to argue that it is unfair to recognize the future treatment expenses and long-term care expenses as damages and to recognize the separate nursing expenses. In addition, even in the case where the plaintiff's nursing is provided by his parent or spouse, the victim may claim compensation against the perpetrator on the ground that the victim suffered damages equivalent to the nursing expenses (see Supreme Court Decision 86Meu2366, Feb. 24, 1987). Thus, there is no argument that the plaintiff's nursing expenses to receive the nursing of his relative should be appropriately reduced.

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 Lee Lee-hee (Presiding Justice)