1. The year when the foundation foundation and the managers of two-points are operated;

2. Death and lost profit of a corporate manager;

3. Funeral expenses in excess of the standards prescribed in the Family Rite Standards Act; and

1. The management of the Foundation's company and the double-class store may be operated until the age of 65 expires;

2. The net profit resulting from the death of a corporate manager shall be the amount obtained by deducting the production cost (the sum of material cost, accessories cost, public imposts, taxes, public charges and other miscellaneous expenses) from the total profit and deducting the company's capital profit (the sum of the amounts equivalent to the respective interest rates on fixed and floating assets) from the balance;

3. The money paid to the branch and the preparation of clothes for the branch and the entertainment expenses for the relatives at home shall be deemed as a special loss when based on the ordinary funeral procedures in accordance with the Family Rite Rules.

Article 763 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff 1 and six others

Defendant

Gwangju District Court Netcheon Branch (78Gahap168)

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant who ordered the plaintiff 1 to pay in excess of the amount equivalent to 5 percent per annum from July 2, 1978 to July 2, 1978, the part against the defendant who ordered the plaintiff 1 to pay in excess of 4,690,714 won, 8,202,448 won to the plaintiff 2, 3,067,48 won to the plaintiff 3, and 5,634,965 won to the remaining plaintiffs, and 5 percent per annum from the date of full payment, shall be revoked, and each of the plaintiffs' claims

The defendant's remaining appeal is dismissed.

The total costs of the lawsuit shall be three minutes, which shall be borne by the plaintiffs, and the remainder by the defendants.

Among the money under paragraph (1), the part of the money exceeding the amount sentenced to a provisional execution by the first instance court may be provisionally executed.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 11,373,340 won, 23,548,90 won to the plaintiff 2, and 8,516,300 won to the plaintiff 3, 4, 5, 6, and 7 respectively, 16,032,60 won to the plaintiff 4, 6, and 7, and the amount equivalent to 5 percent per annum from July 2, 1978 to the date of full payment.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant and a declaration of provisional execution.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

All the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs in the first and second instances.

1. The reasons for the judgment of a party member as to the occurrence of the defendant's liability for damages against the plaintiffs and the offsetting of negligence are identical to the reasons for the judgment of the first instance court as to the same, thereby citing this by Article 390 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Scope of damages;

(A) Loss by lost profit of the deceased Nonparty 1

In light of the following facts: Gap's evidence Nos. 1 (No. 5), 8 (Korean Summary Life Table), Gap's evidence No. 6-2 (No. 1) and the purport of testimony at the first instance court and the first instance court No. 4 (excluding the parts rejected in the first instance court) and 5's testimony, it is hard to find that the above facts were 00 won and 50 won for the above facts, and the average amount of 00 won and 60 won for the above facts were 00 won and 100 won for the above fact-finding (No. 60 won for the above facts-finding) and 100 won for the above facts-finding and 40 won for the above facts-finding and 00 won for the above facts-finding and 00 won for the above facts-finding (No. 40 won for the above facts-finding and 00 won for the above facts-finding). The average amount of 10 years old for the above facts-finding and 000 won for the above fact-finding.

According to the above facts of recognition, if the non-party 1 had not died of the accident in this case, he could benefit from monthly 305,000 won (375,00 won, monthly net profit - 70,000 won, and living expenses) during the period of 174 months from the date of the accident until the average life of 65 months from the date of the accident (less than 65,000 won, monthly income - 70,000 won), and he suffered loss from loss of the above money in the order of loss each month due to the death in the same period due to the accident in the above accident. As the plaintiffs seek, according to the method of calculation of identification method which deducts the intermediate interest as of the time of the accident in this case, it is reasonable to consider that the non-party 1 had the responsibility to compensate for the loss in this case x 39,846,596 won (30,000 won, hereinafter the same shall apply).

Under the premise that Nonparty 1 may make net income of KRW 150,00 each month as a foundation, the Plaintiffs’ legal representative also claimed as damages, apart from the loss of the revenues from the establishment of a foundation. However, as seen above, the above deceased’s legal representative sought the current status of the loss of profits from the establishment of a foundation concurrently from the double-class store operated by himself/herself to the establishment of a foundation and determined the limit of the Defendant’s liability for damages. Thus, the above part of the claim based on the premise that he/she acquired the revenues from the foundation separately from the above recognition’s revenues is groundless. The Plaintiffs’ legal representative again operates the steel store as a concurrent business with the double-class store in his/her address, and even if he/she again obtained the above net profits from the above accident, it is difficult to view the Plaintiffs’ legal representative’s efforts to recognize the above net profits from the establishment of the foundation’s business, and thus, it is difficult to see that there was no evidence to acknowledge the Plaintiff’s net profits from the establishment of the first instance court and the non-party 4’s testimony in his/her name.

(B) The consolation money against the deceased non-party 1

The accident of this case can be easily recognized in light of the empirical rule that the non-party 1 suffered from a fatal injury and suffered severe mental and physical pain until the death of the deceased as seen earlier. Thus, the defendant shall be held liable to do so. In light of all the circumstances shown in the previous purport of the pleading and the degree of negligence of the deceased before the death of the deceased, it is reasonable that the defendant shall pay 1,500,000 won as consolation money for the deceased.

(C) Inheritance relationship

According to the above Gap evidence No. 1, the plaintiff 1's wife, the plaintiff 2's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son's son.

(D) Funeral expenses

According to the statement of Gap evidence No. 7-1 (the statement of non-party 7's non-party 7's testimony) and the testimony of the above witness, since the plaintiff 1 suffered from non-party 1's death, 134,500 won as expenses for the confirmation of the deceased's body, 363,00 won as expenses for the acceptance of body and the entrance, 187,000 won as expenses for memorial expenses such as graveyard reorganization, etc., 187,000 won as expenses for the deceased's body, and 442,540 won as total expenses for funeral expenses for the deceased and the deceased's body, and 60 won as expenses for funeral expenses for the above 60's funeral expenses, the defendant cannot be viewed as 140's funeral expenses for the above 60's funeral expenses for the deceased's funeral expenses, and the above mentioned amount of expenses as expenses for funeral expenses for the plaintiff 14,000 won as expenses for funeral expenses for the above 60's funeral expenses.

(E) The plaintiffs' consolation money

Since it is obvious in light of the empirical rule that the death of Nonparty 1 caused severe mental pain to the plaintiffs due to the accident in this case, the defendant has a duty to protect the suffering of the plaintiffs. Thus, if we look at the general circumstances shown in the pleadings such as the status of the plaintiffs, the property, and the degree of education of the deceased, and the degree of negligence of Nonparty 1 above, the defendant should pay as consolation money the plaintiff 1 a sum of KRW 1,00,000 and KRW 500,000 for the remaining plaintiffs, respectively.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant shall revoke the plaintiff 1's 4,690,714 won (the share of inheritance 2,567,482 + funeral expenses 1,123,232 + 1,000,000) and 8,202,448 won (the share of inheritance 7,702,448 + 50,000 won) and 3,067,482 won (the share of inheritance 2,567,482 + 50,000 won) to the plaintiff 1 and the remaining plaintiffs of 5,634,965 won (the share of inheritance 5,134,965 + the above 50,000 won) and the remaining part of the court below's decision against the plaintiff 2 shall be revoked by applying Article 99 of the Civil Procedure Act to the plaintiff 3's damages for delay by 197.

Judges Kim Jin-han (Presiding Judge) Hun-Ga