The case holding that an unmarried male who has lost his ability to work as a complete male needs to be supported by one adult male family;

The case holding that an unmarried male who has lost his ability to work as a complete male needs to be supported by one adult male family;

Articles 763 and 393 of the Civil Act

[Defendant-Appellee] Plaintiff 1 et al.

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others

Busan High Court Decision 90Na2826 delivered on November 8, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the facts established by the court below, the plaintiff, an unmarried male, who left a post-explor, such as the lower half of the body and the general paralysis, was fully deprived of his ability to work, and the average life expectancy was reduced to about 13 years. For this reason, the plaintiff needs to open a adult male's name in the urterology, urine, bathing, bathing, and the landing and movement (in the case where the plaintiff who can be in the bed part of the bed part of the bed part of the bed part of the bed part of the bed part or the opposite thereto). In light of the records, the above fact-finding by the court below is acceptable, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence.

In a case where an opening person is required to be appointed, unless there are special circumstances, the opening person shall be considered to be sufficient for an adult female. However, as an unmarried male, the court below acknowledged that the plaintiff is an unmarried male, who has lost his/her labor ability as above, and shall take a bath, and he/she shall sit the plaintiff who is under the opening, and shall sit the plaintiff who is under the opening, in a wheelchairs, and in a case where he/she is laid on the shoulder, he/she needs to open the opening of the adult male, and calculated the opening expenses, and therefore, there is no error of law by misapprehending the legal principles of the calculation of the opening expenses, such as the theory of lawsuit, or by misapprehending the legal principles of incomplete deliberation or calculation of the opening expenses. Accordingly, there is no ground for appeal.

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 Jae-chul (Presiding Justice)