1. All appeals by the plaintiffs and the defendant are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by each party.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the modification of the pertinent part of the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance as stated in Paragraph 2 below, and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. A correction of the trial of the court of first instance shall be made to the fifth-party 6 to 11 of the judgment as follows.

The following-the plaintiffs' assertion that since the deceased has engaged in insurance business for more than 10 years from the time of the death of the military, it is necessary to calculate the lost income of the deceased on the basis of statistical income (4,065,965 won per month) of the experienced male in the former type of employment as a result of the fact-finding report on the work by employment type for more than 10 years.

According to the results of the order of submission of tax information about Gap evidence 8-2 and Eul evidence 5-5-5, and the chief of the first instance court's sporesporesporesponding tax office, the plaintiff stated at the police that "the deceased has been in an insurance agency as an insurance solicitor, but there is almost no income." The deceased's business income was 7,213,696 won in 2011, 6,003,185 won in 2012, 6,529,29,298 won in the account of the Korea Development Bank in the name of A, and the fact that the money which appears to be the insurance solicitation fee of the deceased was immediately transferred to other persons such as the subordinate organization on the date of deposit. However, in light of the fact that Gap evidence 8-1, 2, and 9-9, witness testimony was insufficient to acknowledge that the deceased's business income exceeded urban wage while running the insurance business.

Therefore, the plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiffs' claims should be accepted within the scope of the above recognition, and the remaining claims should be dismissed due to the lack of reasonable grounds.

The judgment of the first instance is just in conclusion, and all appeals by the plaintiffs and the defendant are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.