Any action brought in contravention of a non-sub-committee agreement

A lawsuit filed in violation of a non-assignment clause is unlawful because there is no benefit of protection of rights.

Article 226 of the Civil Procedure Act

Plaintiff

Defendant Limited Partnership Company

Busan District Court (78 Gohap1546)

(1) Of the original judgment, the part against the Plaintiff regarding the claim for lost profits of the deceased Nonparty 1, 2, and 3 shall be revoked and the lawsuit shall be dismissed.

(2) The remainder of the original judgment is modified as follows.

(3) The defendant's 14,737,850 won and 13,973,60 won and 35,100 won and 37,950 won from July 17, 1978; 10.1.1. to 37,950 won; 44,950 won from November 1, 197; 45,150 won from 45,150 won; 12.1.1. to 44,150 won; 4,000 won from 46,950 won and 1.7.1.6,000 won and 1.6.7,000 won and 1.6.7,000 won and 1.7,000 won and 1.7,000 won from 46,97,47,47,4750 won and 37.1.7,000 won and 1.6.7,01.7,5,01.1 to 7.7.7.1.3

(4) The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

(5) The costs of lawsuit shall be divided into three parts through the first and second trials, and the two parts shall be borne by the plaintiff and the remainder by the defendant.

(6) Paragraph (3) can be provisionally executed.

The part against the plaintiff in the original judgment shall be revoked.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 49,286,44 won with 5% interest per annum from July 17, 1978 to the date of full payment.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant, and a judgment of provisional execution

The part against the defendant in the original judgment shall be revoked.

The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Judgment on the main defense of this case

On July 16, 1978. 16. 20:00, the plaintiff was driving the motor vehicle owned by the defendant company (vehicle No. 1 omitted) on the 3rd side of the Masan-gun Kimhae-gun, for the purpose of overtaking the above vehicle on the back side of the damages compensation for the above vehicle (vehicle No. 2 omitted), the driver of the defendant company was driving the 3rd side of the 5rd side of the 3rd side of the 5rd side of the 3rd side of the 5rd side of the 3rd side of the 197rd side of the 3rd side of the 3rd side of the 5rd side of the 197rd side of the 3rd side of the 197rd side of the 3rd side of the 3rd side of the 5rd side of the 3rd side of the 5rd side of the 197rd side of the 1st day of the 1st day of the 1st day of the 1st day of the 2nd day of the 3rd side.

The plaintiff's assertion that the above agreement is revoked because the non-party 6, who was delegated by the plaintiff, has no experience in handling the back of the accident, and that the non-party 6's testimony, which corresponds to the fact that the above agreement was made by the insurance company, was inconsistent with the legal effect of this agreement printed by the non-party 6 in the same letter, and the defendant's oral statement that the plaintiff can claim compensation for damages even after the agreement was reached without any difference in terms of the legal effect of this agreement. However, the non-party 6's testimony, which corresponds to the fact that the above agreement

If so, the plaintiff's claim for lost profits against the deceased is filed against the above non-litigation agreement, and it is unlawful as there is no benefit of protecting the rights.

2. Judgment on the merits

(1) Occurrence of damages liability

If the court below's criminal record verification results and the whole purport of oral argument are gathered on the statement No. 2-1 (the written autopsy report) without dispute on the establishment of Gap, the non-party 4, the driver of the defendant company, around 20:00 on July 16, 1978, is obligated to compensate the deceased non-party 7 and the plaintiff for damages caused by the operation of the above cargo vehicle on his own behalf of the defendant company (vehicle No. 1 omitted) on the roads south-nam Kim-gun, the driving of the defendant company (vehicle No. 1 omitted) on the road in front of the main driver's (vehicle No. 2 omitted) on the road in front of the main driver's (vehicle No. 2 omitted) on the road in front of the main driver's workplace in the Gyeongnam-gun, Kim-gun, the non-party 1 and the non-party 7, who were on the part of the deceased's husband of the above non-party 4.

(2) Scope of liability for damages

(a) Actual profits;

If the facts stated in Gap evidence Nos. 1 (No. 1) and Eul evidence No. 5-1,2 (the No. 5's sign and content) and the testimony of non-party No. 6 of the original trial witness gather the whole purport of oral pleadings, the deceased non-party No. 7 is a healthy woman of December 23, 194 who works for daily work in agricultural villages at least if the plaintiff had not been involved in the accident, and is able to gain profits of the same day as stated in the attached list (1) which the plaintiff would have received every month from August 1978 to September 1979 (the plaintiff is claiming that the above non-party No. 1,00,000 won was paid every month in charge of accounting and purchase in the beer's forest management at the time of the accident, but the fact that the non-party No. 6-1, 2, and 300 days were less than the average amount of the deceased's testimony between the plaintiff and the non-party No. 4 of this case.

Therefore, from August 1978 to September 1979, the deceased was engaged in daily work in rural communities and was entitled to obtain net profits of KRW 764,250 as shown in the attached Table (3) even after deducting the living expenses of the above recognition from the monthly income as shown in the attached Table (2) from the monthly income as shown in the attached Table (3). This accident was lost due to this accident. From October 1979 to December 22, 1999 as the plaintiff seeks, for 20 years (for less than annual years, the plaintiff waived, and the following hereinafter the same) from 1979 to 1979, after deducting the living expenses of the above recognition from the monthly income to 4,076 won, the amount of KRW 862,80 [the amount of KRW 4,076,230-160] from 80,000 per year, the amount of KRW 860-160 per year was 860,000 per year.

The right to claim compensation of KRW 11,737,850 in the aggregate amount of the above recognition was inherited to the deceased non-party 7's property heir. If the written evidence No. 1 mentioned above is gathered in the whole purport of pleading, the deceased's property heir and husband are the deceased's three children and husband, but the son died together with the accident and only the plaintiff is the only property heir, so the defendant is obligated to pay the above amount of KRW 11,737,850 to the plaintiff.

B. Determination on the claim for funeral expenses

The plaintiff asserts that the above deceased's death would cover KRW 509,500, funeral expenses, funeral expenses, KRW 110,000, KRW 119,50, and KRW 619,500, and KRW 619,500, and KRW 500,00, in the funeral expenses due to funeral freight and hazardous transportation expenses. Thus, it is insufficient to recognize that Gap's No. 5-1 through No. 8 (Receipt and Invoice) did not have any evidence to acknowledge the authenticity of the above funeral expenses, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff paid the above funeral expenses in light of the evidence to view that there was no evidence to acknowledge that the plaintiff paid the above funeral expenses. Rather, if the defendant gave testimony to non-party 5 of the court below on the statement No. 4 (Simplified Import Statement) without dispute on the establishment of the above deceased, the defendant paid the amount of KRW 1,100,000 to non-party 9 of the deceased non-party 7 and joint funeral expenses.

(c) Compensation money;

The fact that the plaintiff who is the husband of the deceased non-party 7 suffered from the death of the deceased non-party 7 has suffered from the mental suffering which the plaintiff cannot speak, and the defendant has a duty to do so. Thus, considering all circumstances such as the deceased and the plaintiff's age, education, property, living standards, mutual relation between the deceased and the plaintiff, and the situation of death, it is reasonable to determine the amount of 3,00,000 won as consolation money.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, among the plaintiff's claims, the part of the claim for the lost profits other than the deceased non-party 1, 2, and 3, and the part of the claim is inappropriate for the benefit of the protection of rights, and the remaining part of the claim shall be dismissed, and with respect to the defendant's total passive damages and consolation money of KRW 14,737,850 and KRW 13,973,60 of the above amount, the following day after the tort was committed, shall be accepted from July 17, 198 and from August 8, 1978 to September 1, 1979 as shown in the attached list (3) of the attached list (3), to the extent that it is legitimate to claim the payment of damages for lost profits in accordance with the rate of 5 percent per annum from the day following the date on which the damages occurred to the date of full payment, and the remainder shall be dismissed by unjust means.

Therefore, since the part of lost profit among the original judgment among the deceased non-party 1 and two others are unfair in its conclusion, it is unfair to cancel this conclusion and to conclude a different conclusion, it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Article 96, Article 89, Article 92 of the Civil Procedure Act as to the cost of lawsuit, and Article 199 of the provisional execution as to the declaration of provisional execution.

Judges fixed ticket (Presiding Judge) Mobile Engines