(a) Method of determining the method of paying the loss of continuing medical expenses or nursing expenses in the future;

B. The case reversing the judgment of the court below ordering payment of periodical payments

A. In principle, the damage suffered by the victim who is obliged to continuously disburse medical expenses, nursing expenses, etc. in the future due to the aftermathy disability of the injury suffered by a tort is entitled to choose at will the damage claimant himself/herself at his/her own discretion, in principle: Provided, That in cases where it is difficult to determine the continuous period of the disability or the extent of the remaining life expectancy reduced, etc. as in the case of plants, etc., and it is deemed that the damage compensation in the lump-sum payment method could bring about a significant unreasonable result in light of social justice and the ideology of equity, even if the damage claimant claims the payment in lump-sum, the court may render a judgment ordering the payment in the fixed amount at its own discretion.

(b) The case reversing the judgment of the court below ordering the payment of periodic payments on the ground that it is recognized that the remaining remaining life is less than ten years due to severe brain injury caused by a traffic accident, the right-hand side, the whole-hand side of the legacy, the verbal impossibility, etc., and that ordering the payment of a lump-sum payment for damages, such as future treatment expenses, may not be deemed to bring about a significant unreasonable result in light of social justice and equity ideology.

Articles 750 and 763 of the Civil Act

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Han-sung, Attorneys Lee Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Plaintiff Kim Jong-sung, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Attorney Kim Young-chul, Counsel for the defendant-appellant-appellee

Seoul High Court Decision 93Na41176 delivered on May 17, 1994

The part of the judgment of the court below ordering the payment of the periodical payment obligation is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The plaintiff's remaining appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal against the dismissed portion shall be assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal by the Plaintiff’s attorney.

1. Regarding ground of appeal No. 1

In light of the records, the fact-finding of the court below with regard to the circumstance of the accident in this case is just and acceptable, and it cannot be deemed that there was an error in the misapprehension of the rules of evidence against the rules of evidence without making a proper deliberation like the theory of the court below, and if the facts are as determined by the court below, the court below did not err in the misapprehension of the legal principles as to offsetting negligence, thereby making excessive consideration of the fault of the victim. The court below's decision as to the party member's case where the issue is different from the case in this case, and it is not appropriate to invoke the case in this case. There is no reason

2. Regarding ground of appeal No. 2

In principle, whether the injured party who suffered losses for which continuing medical expenses, nursing expenses, etc. are to be paid in the future due to the aftermath of the injury suffered by tort is entitled to make a claim for the compensation of such losses in accordance with a fixed fund and a lump-sum payment is entitled to his own choice, who is the claimant for damages, in principle: Provided, That where it is difficult to determine the continuous period of the disability or the degree of the remaining life expectancy, etc. as in the case of plants, etc., and it is deemed that the compensation in the lump-sum payment method could bring about significant unreasonable results in light of the social justice and the ideology of equity, even if the claimant for damages claims the payment in lump-sum payment, the court may render a judgment ordering the payment in the fixed fund at its own discretion (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da51874 delivered on January 25, 19

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below claimed compensation in lump sum for damages incurred by the plaintiff due to the traffic accident in the future medical expenses and future nursing expenses, but it is anticipated that the plaintiff will be reduced to ten years compared to the normal person because the plaintiff has lost the ability to operate due to the thalinal thale, the right side side of the thale, the aftermathy, and the impossibility of language. In light of the current medical technology level and statistical data alone, it is difficult to predict the accurate duration of the plaintiff's survival, the court below ordered the above future medical expenses and future nursing expenses to be paid as the debt of the court for compensation for each of the above damages on the ground that it is reasonable to pay the plaintiff's survival as the regular fund.

However, according to the relevant evidence and records, it is recognized that the remaining life of the plaintiff was reduced to ten years due to the aftermath disability of the injury caused by the instant traffic accident, and considering the records, it is not recognized that ordering the plaintiff to compensate for future medical expenses and future care expenses in light of social justice and the principle of equity would bring about a significant unreasonable result. Thus, the court below should have ordered the plaintiff to compensate for each of the above losses, upon the plaintiff's claim, after determining the degree of the reduced life of the remaining life due to the aftermath disability of the injury caused by the instant traffic accident.

Nevertheless, the court below ordered compensation for future medical expenses and future medical care expenses in accordance with the regular prohibition method on the grounds as stated in its holding. Therefore, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on damages or by violating the rules of evidence, and it is obvious that such illegality has affected the judgment, and therefore, there is a ground to point this out.

3. As to the third ground for appeal

Examining the reasoning of the judgment below in comparison with the records, it is just that the court below recognized the plaintiff as necessary for an adult female's family head, and it cannot be viewed that there was an error of law by misunderstanding facts against the rules of evidence without making a proper deliberation like the theory of lawsuit in the judgment below, and there is no reason to hold the appeal.

4. Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below ordering the payment of installments is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination as to this part. The plaintiff's remaining appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal as to the dismissed part are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition with the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Shin Sung-sung (Presiding Justice)