Cases where high school students suffered an accident but calculated without being based on the income that can be obtained by engaging in general labor in rural areas;

At the time of the accident, the plaintiff was in the third grade of high school and passed the license examination for the mid-term pilot before the accident, but after the accident, the plaintiff could not work as the mid-term pilot in the future due to the aftermath of the injury caused by the accident, and as the plaintiff lost approximately 40 percent of the work force in rural areas, the actual income of the plaintiff shall be calculated by deducting the income that could have been earned from the income that could have been earned by being employed as the middle-term pilot in the rural area and can be earned by engaging in the said work from the said income that could have been earned by being employed as the middle-term pilot in the rural area.

Article 763 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 78Da2175 decided Feb. 27, 1979; 79Da76 decided Apr. 8, 1980

Freeboards

Korea

Seoul Central District Court (78Gahap4710) in the first instance trial

1. Revocation of the judgment against the plaintiff on the part ordering payment under the original judgment.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 2,921,934 won with 5% interest per annum from July 12, 1978 to the date of full payment.

2. All remaining appeals by the plaintiff and the defendant are dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be divided into five parts through the first and second trials, and such two parts shall be borne by the plaintiff and the remainder by the defendant.

1. Request to the court of first instance;

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 20,460,614 won with 5% interest per annum from July 12, 1978 to the date of full payment.

Litigation costs shall be borne by the defendant.

2. Requests to be changed in the trial;

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 16,525,151 won with an annual interest rate of 5 percent from July 12, 1978 to the full payment day.

The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by one person.

1. The plaintiff;

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

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of 4,525,151 won and the amount at the rate of 5 percent per annum from July 12, 1978 to the full payment day.

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

2. The defendant;

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. Among the reasons why a party member decided on this case, the part recognizing the defendant's liability for damages and the plaintiff's negligence are competing in the cause of the accident in this case, so that the degree of negligence does not reach the extent of exemption from the defendant's liability for damages, and thus, the part which offsets the defendant's liability for damages in determining the amount of damages is the same as that of the original

2. Damages;

(A) Property losses

The plaintiff asserts that property damage was 27,375,252 won and sought payment of KRW 16,425,151, which is a part of the above 27,50 won. Thus, the plaintiff cannot be found to have been engaged in the above 2-th 5-th 2-th 5-th 2-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 14-th 5-th 5-th 14-th 5-th 5-th 5-th 14-th 5-th 5-th 7-th 5-th 5-th 1960-th 5-th 17-2-2-27 of this accident.

On the other hand, if the whole purport of the pleading is added to the statements in the evidence Nos. 1-1 (Evidence Documents) and 2 (Claims for Medical Expenses) without dispute in the formation, the plaintiff was hospitalized in the National Hospital in Seoul for the defendant's management from July 8, 1978 to August 31 of the same year in order to receive the treatment for injury caused by the accident in this case, and there is no other counter-proof.

If so, the plaintiff's property damage is 26,316,540 won (25,448,550,867,990). Considering the above negligence of the plaintiff, it is reasonable to set the amount of damages to be paid by the defendant to the plaintiff as 15,789,924 won.

(b) Mental injury;

Since it is clear in light of the empirical rule that the plaintiff suffered severe mental pain due to the accident of this case, the defendant shall be held liable for it. In light of all circumstances shown in the argument of this case, such as the situation and result of the accident of this case, the age, educational background, family relationship, etc., the amount of consolation money shall be KRW 100,000,000.

(C) The defendant's defense of offsetting

Since the defendant's claim for medical expenses amounting to KRW 867,90 against the plaintiff, it is argued that it would be offset against the defendant's obligation to compensate for damages. Thus, from July 8, 1978 to August 31 of the same year, the plaintiff was hospitalized in the National Seoul National Hospital for the defendant's management and received medical treatment. The plaintiff's medical expenses amounting to KRW 867,990 are as seen earlier, and therefore, the plaintiff is liable to pay the above hospitalization medical expenses to the defendant. Therefore, the defendant's claim for offset is justified.

3. Accordingly, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 15,021,934, which was deducted from the amount of KRW 15,889,924 (15,789,924 +100,000) (the amount of KRW 867,990 which was extinguished by the above-off). Thus, the plaintiff's claim of this case is reasonable within the above-mentioned scope, and it is reasonable to accept the remaining claim. Since the part against the plaintiff among the original judgment with a different conclusion is unfair, and the plaintiff's appeal is only reasonable, the part against the plaintiff is unfair, and the plaintiff's appeal is only reasonable, the part against the defendant shall be revoked and the defendant shall be ordered to pay the amount equivalent to the difference. The remaining appeal of the plaintiff and the defendant's appeal shall be dismissed without any ground, and with respect to the burden of litigation costs, it is decided as per Disposition by applying Articles 96, 89

Judges An associate (Presiding Judge)