205Na45898 Compensation (as referred to in this paragraph)

1. ○○;

Seongdong-gu Seoul Metropolitan Seongdong Pilotage

Yeongdeungpo-gu, Young-gu, Young-gu, Dong for Service

2. ○○○

3. Lighting-○.

4. ○○.

Plaintiff 2. through 4. Address of Seongdong-gu Seoul Haakdong-dong

5. Kim○-○

6. Kim○-○

7. west ○○; and

8. Kim○-○

9. Stambed ○.

10. Kim○-○

11. Kim-○

Plaintiff 5. to 11. The address of Plaintiff 5. to 11. Head of the District Office of origin

12. ○○○○○○

Seoul Westerndaemun-gu

○○○

[Judgment of the court below]

Hyundai Automobile Co., Ltd.

Seocho-gu Seoul Metropolitan Government Yang Jae-dong

Representative Director ○ Kim

Law Firm ○○, Counsel for the defendant-appellant

[Defendant-Appellee]

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2004Gahap41489 Delivered on May 12, 2005

October 24, 2006

January 12, 2007

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the plaintiffs falling under the following order of payment shall be revoked.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 5 61,094,098, and to the plaintiff 8 and 9 50,000 won, each of 300,000 won to the plaintiff 6,7,100 won, each of 200,000 won to the plaintiff 1, 300,000 won to the plaintiff 2, 300,000 won to the plaintiff 2, 300,000 won, 20,141, 540 won, and each of them shall be 5% per annum from August 30, 201 to January 12, 207, and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. All remaining appeals by the plaintiffs are dismissed.

3. All the costs of lawsuit shall be divided into three parts of the first and second instances, and one of them shall be the plaintiffs, and the remainder shall be the defendant's each.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The judgment of the first instance shall be revoked. The defendant shall revoke the judgment of the first instance to the plaintiff 5, 86, 177, 830 won, 8, and 9 each one million won to the plaintiff 5.

Won, Plaintiffs 6, 7, 10, and 11 respectively, and 3 million won to Plaintiffs 1, respectively, and 50,000 won to Plaintiffs 2, 3, and 4 respectively.

58,106,588 Won, Plaintiff 12 (hereinafter referred to as “Plaintiff Company”) and each of them is 201.

8. From 30. to Pronouncement of the first instance judgment, 5% per annum and 20% per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

The payment of each proportion of money shall be made.

1. Basic facts

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or acknowledged by Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 and evidence No. 6-1, taking into account the whole purport of the pleadings, and there is no other counter-proof.

A. On May 7, 2001, the Plaintiff Company purchased from the Defendant 83No9731, the Roys Roys Roon (hereinafter “the Plaintiff Company”) manufactured by the Defendant, and registered as the Plaintiff on May 16, 2001.

B. On August 30, 2001, Plaintiff 1, an employee of the Plaintiff Company, was driving the instant bus at around 06: 45: The accident at around 127 meters from the first shock point to stop in the direction of one hour between the three-lanes and the side (hereinafter referred to as the “accident in this case”) at the speed of about 90 kilometers from the 93-lane point of the Sinan-nam-dong Haan-si, the flown side of the instant bus, while taking the measures to stop one lane on the left side of the instant bus at the speed of about 90 kilometers.

를 당하였는데, 당시 최초 충격지점과 최종 정지지점 사이에서 이 사건 승합차의 좌측 뒷바퀴가 차축으로부터 파단 ( 破斷 ) 되어 빠져 나갔다 .

C. The road in which the accident of this case occurred is about 2% slope declines, and is be bended by a ndrop packing with a perfect of about 460 meters in the radius of the valleys, and is 3.6 means a erop packing, and the erop-day fladrums were built clear.

D. Due to the instant accident, Plaintiff 1, the employees of Plaintiff 5, who were on board the instant vans, suffered injuries, such as the loss and establishment of diversity of both sides, and was destroyed by the instant vans owned by the Plaintiff Company, and parts of the instant vans and parts thereof, which were actually on the part of the Plaintiff Company.

E. Plaintiffs 2 and 3 centered on Plaintiff 1 and their parents, Plaintiff 4 are students, and Plaintiff 6 and 7 centered on Plaintiff 5 are grandparents, Plaintiff 8 and 9, parents, Plaintiff 10 and 11 are students.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiffs' assertion

원고들은, 이 사건 사고는 원고 1이 이 사건 승합차를 정상적으로 운행하던 중 사고 지점에 이르러 갑자기 차체가 흔들리며 좌측으로 쏠리면서 중앙분리대를 부딪치게 되어 부득이 핸들을 우측으로 돌리자 이 사건 승합차가 우측으로 넘어지게 된 것으로, 중앙분리대와 부딪치기 이전에 이미 좌측 뒷바퀴 베어링의 결함으로 인하여 베어링과 차축이 용착 ( 鎔着, 쇠붙이 따위가 녹아서 붙음 ) 되어 과부하가 걸리자 차축이 부러진 것이므로, 이 사건 승합차를 제조 · 판매한 피고는 제조물책임 또는 채무불이행책임 내지 하자담보책임으로 이 사건 사고로 인하여 원고들이 입은 손해를 배상할 책임이 있다고 주장한다 .

B. Defendant’s assertion

In this regard, the defendant asserts that the accident of this case occurred by the plaintiff 1 while driving at a roadside, and there was an abnormal change in the back wheeling or the wheeling of the left side due to the impact on the wind that the plaintiff 1 was faced with the central separation zone. Therefore, the plaintiffs' claim is groundless.

3. Facts of recognition;

The following facts are acknowledged based on Gap evidence 8-25, 26, Gap evidence Nos. 9, 32, Eul evidence Nos. 1-3, Eul evidence Nos. 1-3, evidence Nos. 1-25, evidence Nos. 8-26, evidence Nos. 1-2, evidence Nos. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, evidence No. 1-2, and evidence No. 8-2, and each fact-finding with respect to E. ○○ in the first instance trial, and no other counter-proof is found.

A. A. Bening and a axis structure (1) of this case are the rear-wheeled motor vehicle, and the wheel power of a axis connected with the rear wheels is delivered to the wheels. Bening is wrapping the string to ensure that the wheel can move along with the body.

(2) bending is to be connected to the body of a vehicle (the outer wheels shall be connected to the body of a vehicle) with the inner wheels suitable for the body of a vehicle (the string and fixed in a manner consistent with the body of a vehicle), and the outer wheels part connected to the body of a vehicle (the outer wheels part shall be connected to the body of a vehicle)

During the two forms of the inner wheels, it is placed between the inner wheels and the outer wheels at a certain interval of time by the liner (in the inner wheels, the side of the dumm shall be the outer wall, and the outer wall of the dumm shall be the side of the dumm, and the outer wall of the dumm shall be the side of the dumm) and the outer wheels shall be connected to the body of the vehicle.

The role of roller is to ensure that the inner wheels can be moved along with the string with the string. (3) On the bending side, the string line is to ensure that the string inside the string is maintained at a certain level, while the string is fixed to the string, and the string of the string line is spreading the string line to the string so that the string can be put in the string in the process of the assembly.

B. On the spot situation after the accident and the situation of collision with the central separation zone (1) the central separation zone of the accident point of this case, where the left side of the instant wheeled vehicle passes more than 52 to 78cm, and there is only a leap caused by the front and rear wheels of the instant wheeled vehicle on the surface near the central separation zone of the accident points, and there is no particular slekes in the instant road from the first shock point to the final stop point, and there is no other slekes in the above road’s right side. (2) The front end part of the board of the instant wheeled vehicle is 8, the left side part of the instant wheeled vehicle is 8, the left side part of the instant wheeled vehicle is 1,000,000,000,000 more than the left side side of the instant vehicle, and the front part is 0,000,0000,000 more than the left side side of the instant vehicle.

(3) On the right side of the instant bus, there is no other trace of damage other than that caused by a wide stringing. (4) The rear wheels of the instant bus is cut off on the upper left side and separated from the body, while there is a little degree of damage on the front side of the instant bus with the upper 2 wheels at the bottom of the instant bus, and the front side of the instant bus with the upper 2 wheels at the bottom of the upper end of the instant bus with the width of the upper 5 square meters, and the front left side of the upper end of the instant bus with the upper 2 wheels at the top of the upper end of the instant bus with the upper end of the 5 wheels, and the upper end of the instant bus with the upper end of the upper end of the 5 wheels at the top of the upper end of the instant bus with the upper end of the 5 wheels, and the upper end of the upper end of the instant bus with the upper end of the 2nd height of the upper end, such as the upper end of the 7th height of the upper end.

C. After the accident, the condition of the tea axis and the parts around the bending (1) axis is about 19mm in radius, and the materials are the carbon mouth. The heat-processing floors from the surface to the degree of 5mm, and the inside of the roof is the rash layer. The inside of the rash is the rash layer, and there was no particular defect in the materials or longitude of the rash. However, after the accident, the rash level was considerably reduced by the impact of the surface of the rash-spher part after the accident.

( 2 ) 차축의 파단부는, 경화층인 표면부는 취성파괴 ( 脆性破壞, 어떤 재료가 소성 변형을 거의 하지 아니한 채 일으키는 파괴, 즉 유리가 깨지는 것처럼 단번에 일어나는 파괴를 말한다 ) 의 전형적인 양상인 V 마크 ( chevron 마크 ) 를 보이고, 이들이 파괴의 근원점인 키홈을 향하고 있으며, 비경화층인 차축 내부는 입계파괴 ( 粒界破壞 ) 의 양상을 보이고 있는 반면, 피로파괴 ( 疲勞破壞 ) 의 증거인 비치 ( beach ) 마크는 보이지 않는데, 이는 파괴가 키홈에서 시작하여 일시에 일어났음을 보여준다 . ( 3 ) 회전하고 있는 차축이 베어링의 고착에 의하여 파단된 경우 거기에 작용한 힘은 주로 비틀림 응력 ( 應力, 물체에 외력이 작용하였을 때 그 외력에 저항하여 물체의 형태를 그대로 유지하려고 물체 내에 생기는 내력으로 변형력이라고도 한다 ) 이고, 비틀림 응력에 의하여 파단된 경우 그 파단면은 흔히 나선형으로 되어 있는 파배기 모양을 나타내는 데 반하여 이 사건 차축의 파단면은 꽈배기 모양이 아니나, 한편 급속히 발생한 금속의 파단면 형상은 응력의 종류보다 재질에 더 영향을 받는 것으로, 재료가 전체적으로 균질하고 취성이 강하며 특별히 응력이 집중될 취약 부위가 없는 경우 ( 이 경우 비틀림 응력에 의하여 발생한 파단면은 꽈배기 모양을 나타낸다 ) 와 달리 이 사건 승합차의 차축처럼 재료가 표면부는 취성이 강하고 내부는 취성이 약하며 키홈과 같은 응력이 크게 집중되는 취약 부위가 있는 경우에는 꽈배기 모양이 나타나지 않는 경우도 많다 .

(4) The theoretical name of beering (main distance) is at least 13 million km, and it is assumed that the instant passenger car is at least 21,000 km from the delivery, and that there was any defect at the initial stage in the materials or longitude of beering. However, after an accident, the breath of the breath is likely to have been reduced (e) by the air condition of the inner wall and outer wall of the beering, and the breath of the grosting is likely to have been removed by the air condition of the 8-wheeled shape, and the grosting and outer wall of the grosting is likely to have been removed by the air condition of the grosting, and the grosting and outer wall of the grosting are likely to have been removed by the air condition of the grosting in the direction of the grosting in the direction of the grosting and the erosting in the direction of the me.

D. (1) The main cause of the destruction of the tea, such as appraisal opinion, is ordinarily a part required for the reduction of the tea due to any defect in the jing material itself or any balling damage. Among them, in order to find out the cause of the balling damage, the inspection of the balling part should be conducted. However, in this case, most of the balling parts are lost at the beginning of the accident, and only the balling with only the balling wheels remains at the end of the accident, making it difficult to find out the exact cause.

(2) As recognized in the above b. above, the passenger car in this case conflicts with the central separation zone, the role of the part from the outer side of the sloping at the bottom of the central separation zone, the degree of damage on the left side and the side of the sloping in this case, and the shock on the front left side of the left side in contact with the central separation zone, even though the shock on the upper side of the sloping in this case was more important, the relevant part axis was not cut, and the degree of traces and the sloping part of the sloping part of the sloping in Althank was not cut off. In light of the above, the passenger car in this case and the central separation zone in this case face not only the side but also the back qui of the left side and the central separation zone in this case, and it is not likely that the shock of the shock amount between the upper side sloping and the central separation zone in this case.

(3) Since the contact range at the bottom of the central separation zone and the left bottom is below the center of the string, the shock is very small to the string, and the compressed response power is very small to the string. Such a nding response power (in addition, string is contacted with the strong pressure on the surface, so the nding response power is not very large to the surface) is not operated by the nding.

(4) When driving at a speed of 90 km, the distance of 127 meters between the initial shocking point and the final stop point may arrive at 5 seconds. The left wheel wheels up to 2 meters between them runs above 60 times as much as possible (in fact, the left wheel wheels is found in the middle of the above point, and the point departing from the body was the front, it is reasonable to see that 10~15 times as it occurred in the course or before the meeting. As such, it is difficult to reach the left wheel of the vehicle with the front direction of the vehicle, such as the extreme flab and the outer wall, etc. of this case, and the front wheel and the front wheel of this case, which is likely to cause excessive interference with the left wheel of the vehicle, and the rear wheel of this case, which is likely to cause excessive interference with the left wheel in the direction of the vehicle, and the rear wheel of this case, which is likely to cause excessive interference with the left wheel of this case.

(6) The accident, like the instant accident, is rarely reported.

4. Determination as to the existence of liability

A. Legal principles on product liability

A manufacturer who manufactures and sells a product is liable to manufacture and sell the product with safety and durability within the expected range in light of the level of technology and economic feasibility at the time of its distribution. In the event of loss to consumers due to a defect that does not meet such safety and durability, liability for damages should be premised on the existence of a defect, damage, and causation between the defect and the occurrence of damage. However, if the manufacturer is liable to compensate for damage due to a defect that is produced in large quantity with high technology concentration, the manufacturing process of the product can only be known by only the manufacturer, and whether damage was caused by such defect is not attributable to 200, 200, 30, 40, 50, 50, 200, 50, 200, 30,000, 30,000,000,000,000,000,000,0000,000,000,000,000,00,000).

B. In light of the existence of defects (1) no other defects in the relevant Gohap’s materials themselves, as recognized earlier, and the degree of a reduction of the reduction of the reduction has not been caused due to the shock itself between the relevant Gohap and the central separation unit. On the other hand, it was serious that the heat generated by a serious string with the focus on the bend part, which could have been sufficiently caused by the string, and there were no other circumstances that may cause the string, it is reasonable to deem the string of the instant string to have been caused by the string of the instant string, not by the string of the instant string, and that the string of the instant string, which had been caused by the string of the instant string and the string of the instant string of the instant strings, and that the string of the instant strings, which had been caused by the string of the instant strings and the string of the instant strings.

(3) If it is deemed that the exploitation of the bending part has already occurred prior to shocking with the centralized separation zone, the accident of this case constitutes a case where a large-scale technology was integrated and used normally. In light of the structure, role, assembly condition, etc. of bending, it is an area under the exclusive control of a manufacturer, and it cannot be said that such a bruing is ordinarily occurring without the manufacturer’s negligence. Thus, even if it is impossible to accurately ascertain the specific cause of the bending part, the defendant, a manufacturer, fails to prove that the accident of this case occurred due to other causes than the defect of the product, it is presumed that the accident of this case has a defect that has already been equipped with the reasonable safety expected as a matter of course in the bend part, and that the accident of this case has been presumed to have occurred due to such defect.

(c) Whether there is a defect (the lack of conformity with the goods);

As above, any defect that can occur in the bending part of the passenger car of this case can be seen as a defect that the plaintiff company purchased the passenger car of this case from the defendant, which is a premise to hold the defendant liable for the non-performance of the obligation or the warranty against the defect. In other words, there is a lack of quality and performance of the goods.

D. Sub-committee

Therefore, the defendant is responsible for product liability for the remaining plaintiffs except for the plaintiff company, and the plaintiff company is liable for the non-performance of obligation or warranty against defects, and is liable for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs due to the accident in this case.

5. Scope of liability;

A. Determination on the plaintiffs' claims except the plaintiff company

With respect to the plaintiff 5, the calculation of the amount of damages is as shown in the attached Table of the calculation of the amount of damages, in addition to the following separate statements. The calculation of the present price shall be in accordance with the Hofman discount method, and the period of less than a month and the amount of less than KRW

(1) The Plaintiff 5’s lost income: The occupation and income of KRW 73,280,103 (A) shall be the Plaintiff Company’s employee at the time of the instant accident, but it shall be deemed that at least the amount of income equivalent to the ordinary wage for urban day may be obtained. (b) The ratio of loss of future disability and operating capacity shall be determined.

(1) The construction of a bridge on the right-side 1 through 5 spawal damage, the left-hand spawal damage, the left-hand spawal damage, and the establishment of a spawal spawal spawal spawal spawal spawal 16.76% of the permanent disability [Recognizing 50% of the 50% of the 50% of the 16.76% of the total evaluation table on the post-Mablasal damage

② Ratifications caused by slots on the left and right side and a spawal spawal spawal and a spawal spawal spawal spawal spawal spawal spawal spawal spawal spawals: A person who remains spawal in the outer appearance (15% of the loss rate of labor ability) but may not be exposed to the parts generated by the drilling, and a person who can be improved to some extent by sexual spawal swal swal swal swal

③ From August 30, 2001 to November 19, 2001, from November 23, 2001 to February 19, 2002, from June 4, 2002 to July 4, 2002, the hospitalized treatment was conducted for about seven months during the period from June 4, 2002 to July 4, 2002, and the amount of damage is deemed to have lost the operation ability of 100% until March 31, 202, which is seven months after the date of the accident for calculation’s convenience, until the maximum working age reaches 60 years (D).

(1) On December 31, 2002, which was granted temporary layoff benefits: Up to December 31, 2002: 8,424,682 won.

③ Total sum: 73,280,103 (2) Plaintiff 5’s nursing expenses

Plaintiff 5 requested payment of the opening expenses of KRW 5,00,285 from November 23, 2001 to February 19, 2002, and from June 4, 2002 to July 4, 2002, as the nursing expenses of KRW 5,009,285 are required due to the lectures of the right-hand 1 through 5 and the distribution of the right-hand legy damage, etc., but the said Plaintiff’s claim against this part is without merit, since it is not recognized that opening is necessary in light of the part and degree of the injury suffered by the said Plaintiff.

(3) Plaintiff 5’s future treatment costs: 6,326,00 won

Inasmuch as there is no evidence to acknowledge that expenses for future treatment have been paid not later than the date of closing argument in the trial, the intermediate interest shall be deducted by deeming that the payment was made twice twice on October 31, 2006 and on January 31, 2007, which is three months after the date of closing argument in the trial for the convenience of calculation, and the interim interest shall be deducted. (4) It is deemed that the payment was made twice on January 31, 2007, which is three months after the date of closing argument in the trial for the convenience of calculation.

The plaintiff 5 did not properly deal with the accident of this case due to the increase of safety level so that it can spread. Since the above mistake of the plaintiff was caused by the occurrence and expansion of damages caused by the accident of this case, it shall be considered in determining the amount of damages that the defendant should compensate, but it shall be reasonable to view that the ratio exceeds 10%, the amount of damages after offsetting negligence shall be as follows.

(A) The actual income during the period of temporary layoff benefits: 8, 424, 682 won ¡¿ 0.9 = 64,85, 421 won = 64,85, and 421 won ¡¿ 0.9 = 6,326,00 won in the future treatment expenses: 6,326,00 won = 0.9 = 5,693, 400 won (5).

After the instant accident, Plaintiff 5 received temporary layoff benefits from the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation, 12, 940, 620 won, and disability benefits 14, 969, and 180 won. If the said temporary layoff benefits are deducted from the actual income of the period during which the said temporary layoff benefits were received, the said temporary layoff benefits do not remain, and if the said disability benefits are deducted from the actual income of the said period, the said disability benefits shall be deducted from the actual income of the next (the medical care benefits shall not be deducted from the above daily income or the future medical care expenses). (6) The details and results of the instant accident, the degree and degree of the injury, the degree of negligence, the Plaintiff 5 is an unmarried female, the relationship between the said Plaintiffs, and all other circumstances indicated in the arguments.

(B) Plaintiff 5: 10 million won

Plaintiff 8 and 9: each of 500,000 won

Plaintiff 6, 7, 10, 11: each of 300,000 won

Plaintiff 1: 2 million won

Plaintiff 2, 3, and 4: each 300,000 won (7) final recognition

Plaintiff 5: 61, 094, 098 won [the actual daily income of KRW 58,369,878 (the actual daily income of KRW 58,69,878 after the period of temporary layoff benefits) + The amount of future treatment expenses of KRW 5,693, 400 - deducted KRW 14,969, 180 + the amount of consolation money of KRW 12 million + the amount of consolation money of KRW 1,2 million]; The remaining Plaintiffs: the same as the amount of consolation money of each case.

[Evidence Evidence] Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 4, 7, 12, and 15; the result of physical examination commissioned to the president of the Seoul University Hospital of the first instance; the result of fact-finding on the Korea Labor Welfare Corporation in the first instance court; the result of fact-finding, experience, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. Determination on the claim of the Plaintiff Company (1) medical expenses for Plaintiff 1 and 5: KRW 1,361,284

The Plaintiff Company sought payment of KRW 6,360,870 in total for Plaintiff 1,5 medical expenses, nursing expenses, and business trip expenses incurred from the instant accident on behalf of 6,360,870, and accordingly, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the pleadings in part of the evidence Nos. 21, 22, and 24, Gap 11, and 17, and the witness Kim Jong-○’s testimony, the Plaintiff Company may recognize the difference between the Plaintiff Company’s 5’s reimbursement of KRW 28,820, 50, 1, 235, 1, 180, and 180, 160, 160, 300, 160, 16, 16, 16, 300, 16, 16, 300, 160, 16, 160, 180, 205, 201, 305, 1500, 100, 1.

(2) Traffic expenses due to vehicle damage: 1.350,000 won

In full view of Gap evidence No. 20, Gap evidence No. 17, and witness Kim Jong-○'s testimony, the plaintiff company supplied the passenger-only equipment of this case or used them for local business trips, etc. for a considerable period of time due to the accident of this case, and it can be recognized that the plaintiff company paid 675,000,000 won in total, including the average use cost of the passenger-only vehicle of this case, 10,000 won, 175,00 won for the month of Seoul metropolitan area, and 1.6 million won for the month of the accident of this case (in other cases, it is not sufficient to recognize this fact only with the above evidence to acknowledge that the defendant spent 1.6 million won average monthly expenses for the business trip of this case). Considering the period required for the repair of the passenger-only vehicle of this case, or the causes of the accident of this case, the damage of this case shall be deemed to be reasonable for 25,000 won in proximate causal relation with the traffic damage of this case.

(3) Loss due to the destruction of equipment: 9.7 million won

Comprehensively taking account of the partial descriptions of evidence Nos. 17, 18, and 19 and the purport of the entire pleadings as to witness Kim Jong-○ of the first instance trial, the Plaintiff Company may recognize the fact that the Plaintiff incurred damages of KRW 9,700,000,000, which is the difference by being disposed of as the equipment was destroyed due to an accident while the Plaintiff was carrying a sprinkler (7,00,000 won) and a cooling equipment for petition (4,50,000 won) on the instant passenger vehicle at the time of the instant accident, and there is no other counter-proof.

(4) Expenses for purchase of vehicles: 6,300,866 won

The Plaintiff asserted that the Defendant would seek the payment of KRW 13,094,690 for the purchase cost of the instant vehicle due to the spread of the instant passenger car due to the instant accident. However, according to the evidence adopted earlier, the instant passenger car was sold by the back wheels of the left-hand side, and was damaged to the left-hand side, but it appears that the repair would be possible to operate according to its original purpose. Thus, the Plaintiff could only seek damages corresponding to the repair cost. In full view of the purport of the argument stated in the evidence No. 8-18, it can be acknowledged that the Defendant required KRW 6,300,866 at the repair cost of the instant passenger car. In full view of the purport of the argument stated in the evidence No. 8-18,429,390 as the repair cost of the instant passenger car: In full view of the purport of the entire arguments stated in the evidence No. 6-2,3,490 as the whole, the Plaintiff Company cannot be recognized as constituting the instant passenger car at the expense of the National Investigation Institute’s Association’s 192,390.

(6) Vehicle insurance premiums

The Plaintiff Company sought payment of KRW 880,110,00 in total of the liability insurance premium from September 1, 2001 to October 17, 2004 to the instant passenger vehicle. However, as long as the Plaintiff acknowledged the loss of transportation expenses due to the vehicle damage under the foregoing paragraph (2), the above insurance premium damages cannot be deemed to have a proximate causal relation with the instant accident. (7) Business losses

The plaintiff company asserted that the damage of the van was an obstacle to the business of this case, and that some of the statements in the evidence Nos. 13, 14, 17, and 20 and the testimony of the witness Kim Jong-○ of the first instance trial were insufficient to recognize it, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. The plaintiff company's sales from Oct. 1, 2001 to Sept. 30, 201, compared to the sales from Oct. 1, 2001 to Dec. 31, 2001.

(8) Recognition Amount: Determination on the Defendant’s assertion that the sum of KRW 20,141,540 (medical expenses of KRW 1,361,284 + transportation expenses of KRW 1,350,00 + KRW 6,300,866 + storage expenses of KRW 1,429,390 + KRW 9) (9)

The defendant asserted that the defendant could not bear the warranty liability because it did not notify the plaintiff company that there was a defect within 6 months from the time of purchase or delivery of the plaintiff company's van. However, the defendant is not only liable for default due to the plaintiff company's supply of incomplete goods, and according to the evidence adopted earlier, the plaintiff company notified the defendant that the above defect had already been notified at the time of the accident immediately after the accident occurred after 3 months from the time of delivery of the van. Thus, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.

6. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay 50,000 won to plaintiffs 5, 61, 094, 098, 8, and 9 respectively to plaintiffs 5, 300,000 won to plaintiffs 6, 7, 10, and 11, respectively, and 200,000 won to plaintiffs 1, 300,000 won to plaintiffs 2, 300,000 won to plaintiffs 2, 300,000 won to the plaintiff company, 20,141,540 won to the plaintiff company, 20,000 won to the plaintiff company, 20,000 won to the plaintiff company, 20,000 won to the defendant from August 30, 201 to January 12, 2007, and 200,000 won to the plaintiff 8,000 won per annum under the Civil Act, and the remaining part of the plaintiffs' appeal is dismissed as it is without merit.

The presiding judge shall appoint a judge

Judges Lee Dong-dae

Judges Kim Jong-ok

The damages calculation table

A person shall be appointed.

lost income + Other damages 190, 795, 980 won

[Contributory Negligence] 0%

90,795,980 won

[Deduction]

Industrial accident insurance money 27,909,800 won

[Property Damages] 62,86, 180 won