The case which recognized the changed ability for three-year students at a national school of the age of 9 and 8 months;

When crossing the road, it is necessary to ensure the safety of the vehicle by checking the traffic of the vehicle well and to prevent the occurrence of an accident by crossing the road. It can be sufficiently changed as a three-year student at national schools of the age of 9 and 8.

Articles 753 and 755 of the Civil Act

68Da1822 decided Feb. 25, 1969 (Supreme Court Decision 120Da120 decided Feb. 25, 1969; Supreme Court Decision 17Da1232 decided Feb. 25, 196; Decision 753(2)548 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff 1 and two others

Countries

Seoul Central District Court (66A13893) of the first instance court

(1) Of the original judgment, the part concerning plaintiffs 1 and the defendant in the original judgment is modified as follows.

(2) The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 the amount of 708,504 won and the amount of 5% per annum from October 14, 1964 to the full payment.

(3) Plaintiff 1’s remaining claims are dismissed.

(4) The defendant's appeal against the plaintiff 2 and 3 is dismissed.

(5) Of the costs of lawsuit, the costs of lawsuit brought between the plaintiff 1 and the defendant shall be divided into three parts through the first and second trials, and one of which shall be borne by the plaintiff, and the remainder shall be borne by the defendant. (B) The costs of appeal brought between the plaintiff 2, 3 and the defendant shall be borne by the defendant.

(6) Only under Paragraph (1) of the original judgment, Plaintiff 2 and 3 are entitled to provisional execution for the part of this judgment exceeding the amount of KRW 540,000 and the amount calculated by the annual rate of KRW 5% from October 14, 1964 to the full payment.

The attorney of the plaintiff (Appellant) sought a declaration of provisional execution that "the defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 1,283,728 won a sum of 100,000 won per annum from October 14, 1964 to full payment, and the amount of 5% per annum from October 14, 1964. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant."

The defendant (Appellant) performer filed a judgment that "the part of the original judgment against the defendant is revoked. The plaintiffs' claim is dismissed. All the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs in the first and second instances."

(1) Defendant’s tort liability

In light of Gap evidence No. 1 (No. 2), evidence No. 3 (C. 1), evidence No. 1 (C. 1) and evidence No. 1 (C. 203), and the testimony and arguments of the non-party No. 1 of the original instance court, which do not conflict with the establishment, the non-party No. 2 belonging to the 303 House No. 1205 House No. 303, U.S. 13, 1964 as an affiliated driver of the military unit, where the non-party No. 2 was working at the workplace of the non-party No. 25 tons of the vehicle belonging to the non-party No. 300, Oct. 13, 1964, and was working at the workplace of the non-party No. 20,000, 200,000 U.S. 20,000,000).

Thus, the defendant is responsible for compensating for the damages caused by the non-party 2's illegal act in accordance with the State Compensation Act.

(2) Judgment on the Defendant’s assertion of comparative negligence

In full view of the above-mentioned facts, evidence Nos. 1 and the purport of oral argument, Plaintiff 1 can be acknowledged as the fact that Plaintiff 1 tried to cross a road as a three-year student at a national school of the age of 9 and 8 months at the time of the instant accident and died by shocking to the above vehicle. When intending to cross a road, crossing the road after checking the vehicle's traffic and safety, thereby preventing the occurrence of an accident can be sufficiently changed as a three-year student at a national school of the age of 9 and 8 months. Since Plaintiff 1's negligence by neglecting this duty of care was recognized as the cause of the instant accident, the above negligence should be considered in determining the amount of damages to be compensated by the Defendant.

(3) Loss

Furthermore, we judge the damages amount of the plaintiffs.

(A) Loss of Plaintiff 1’s import

According to the above Gap evidence Nos. 1 (O. 4) and non-party 1's testimony, it can be recognized that the plaintiff 1 had been an ordinary male chain of 9 years of age 8 (195 February 10, 195) at the time of this accident. The average male life expectancy of 46.8 years of age 9 shall be a significant fact for party members. It is extremely difficult to calculate the amount of loss of income that the plaintiff 1 and the same minor could have accrued in the future. However, in today's case, since the plaintiff 1 had been employed for 30 years of age 5 years of age 6, it shall be deemed that the plaintiff would have sustained income from any occupation if he reached a certain age, and since the plaintiff 2 had been employed for 30 years of age 5 years of age 24 years of age 6, it may be recognized that the plaintiff had an ability to provide labor for 32 years of age 50 years of age 10,000 of age 2, respectively.

(B) Medical expenses of Plaintiff 1

In full view of the appraisal results and arguments of the above appraiser 3, the plaintiff 1 needs to take two medicines for a life to treat the cerebral psychotropic disorder caused by the above injury, the mental disorder caused by the above injury, the nephalopic ney, and the nephalopic nephy, etc., and the amount of the medicine is equivalent to 21,600 won per year, and the treatment is required for the neutic treatment for six months, and the treatment cost is required for the neutic alphy, and the above treatment cost is required for 9,000 won per month from March 1967. The above plaintiff is conducting the above treatment from around March 1967. Since the above plaintiff 1 claimed the treatment expenses for the above nephal alphal ley and the above treatment expenses to be spent every six months for the remaining 43 years, and the method of calculating the treatment expenses for the above nephy 34,000 won per annum.

Therefore, the sum of the above treatment costs of KRW 496,89, and KRW 987,756, which is the sum of KRW 496,89, and KRW 490,857, the sum of the above treatment costs of KRW 490,857, and KRW 987,756, which the Plaintiff 1 sustained due to the accident of this case. However, considering the above Plaintiff’s negligence, the amount of damages and the Defendant’s compensation amount of KRW 658,5

(C) The plaintiffs' consolation money

The plaintiff 1 is the victim's father, the plaintiff 2, and the plaintiff 3's mother (the above Gap evidence No. 1) who suffered a lot of mental pain due to the above injury. The consolation money is recognized as the plaintiff 1 in consideration of all the circumstances such as the situation of the accident, the degree of injury, the degree of negligence of the plaintiff 1, and the degree of negligence of the plaintiff 1, 50,000 won for the plaintiff 1, and 30,000 won for each of them.

(4) Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 1 the above sum of KRW 708,500, KRW 30,000 for each of the plaintiffs' claims against the plaintiff 2, and KRW 30,000 for each of these claims and damages for delay at a rate of 5% per annum from October 14, 1964 to the full payment. Thus, the plaintiffs' claims against the plaintiff 1 are justified within the above limit, and the remainder of the plaintiff 1's claims are just and dismissed. The judgment below which shall be accepted in excess of the above limit is modified to the extent that it is not consistent with the above limit. The defendant's appeal against the plaintiff 2, and the defendant's appeal against the plaintiff 3 is without merit, and the costs of the lawsuit are dismissed, and it is decided as per Disposition by applying Article 199 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to the declaration of provisional execution under Articles 9, 19 of the same Act.

Judges Park Jong-su (Presiding Judge)