logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.06.19 2019나68079
손해배상(자)
Text

1. Of the judgment of the first instance court, the part against the Plaintiff corresponding to the amount ordered to be additionally paid under paragraph (2).

Reasons

1. Of the grounds for appeal by the plaintiff and the defendant, the argument related to limitation of liability is not significantly different from the argument in the first instance court, and even if the evidence additionally submitted by this court is reviewed together, the first instance judgment on limitation of liability is just and acceptable.

Therefore, this court's reasoning is the same as that of the relevant part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus cites this part in accordance with the main sentence 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.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 13, 20 evidence, Eul 6 evidence (including each number if there is a serial number), the physical commission and fact inquiry results of the G Hospital funeral, and the purport of the court, the rule of experience, and the whole oral argument]

A. Personal information 1) Personal information: The same is as indicated in the “basic matter” sheet for calculation of the attached amount of damages (the Plaintiff’s life ratio is deemed to be 65% from the date of appraisal). 2) The income and operation period asserted that the Plaintiff, as a construction business operator installing air conditioners and air conditioners with five years’ experience at the time of the instant accident, has earned income from KRW 5,345,00 to KRW 8,92,583 as the monthly average income, and thus, the amount of the lost income should be calculated on the basis of the statistical income of pipes in the report on the survey on the actual status of construction business.

The actual income amount of victims who had certain income at the time of tort is actually gained at the time of the accident according to objective and reasonable data.

arrow