1. All appeals filed by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiffs.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of this court citing the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the portion “A. The deceased’s lost income” under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and thus, this part is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

[Supplementary Use]

A. In light of the following circumstances, the Deceased’s lost income 1) the Plaintiffs asserted that, at the time of the instant accident, the Deceased continued to take walscruscruscruscruscruscruscruscrus at the time of the instant accident, and sought payment of the lost income for three years. 2) First, as to whether the Deceased is a farmer, there is no agricultural product shipment data in the deceased’s name for three years before the Deceased’s death, namely, there is no agricultural product shipment data in the deceased’s name for three years before the Deceased’s death, and the Plaintiff C, an son’s son, at the investigative agency, stated that the Deceased had been working at the real estate located in Seoposcruscrus at the time of the instant accident, at the time of the instant accident, there is insufficient evidence to acknowledge that the Deceased was engaged in the agriculture at the time of the instant accident.

(3) The maximum working age, which serves as the basis for lost income, may be determined by the fact-finding court, based on specific circumstances, such as the number of workers by age, employment rate, labor participation rate, and the limitation on the retirement age by occupation, in addition to the social and economic conditions, such as the average remaining life, economic level, employment conditions, etc. of the nation’s citizens, whether the presumed maximum working age under the empirical rule is derived from this investigation, or the relevant injured party’s age, occupation, career, health status, etc. (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 96Da46491, Dec. 23, 1997).