Where a victim who has suffered from mental illness due to aftermath of a traffic accident commits suicide while in the appellate trial, the causal relationship between the traffic accident and the death.

There is a proximate causal relation between the accident of drinking an agrochemical and the death of the deceased, even though the victim suffering from mental illness, such as the old disorder, memory and calculation ability disorder, inappropriate emotional response, collision adjustment disorder, and solar behavior, due to the aftermath of a traffic accident, was hospitalized for more than one year, and conducted self-treatment, but the above symptoms were not improved at all, there is a proximate causal relation between the accident of drinking an agrochemical and the death of the deceased. However, even on the part of the victim, there is negligence in care and custody that did not prevent the

Articles 393, 396, and 763 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 67Da1297 Decided June 18, 1968 (Law No. 750(2) A (12), 1138, 452) 72Da268 Decided April 20, 1972 (Law No. 750(2)(12), 1164, 750(2)(No. 750(2)(A), 10069 local government 20/213)

Plaintiff 1 et al., a litigation taking over the deceased Nonparty 1 and two others

Defendant 1 and one other

Seoul District Court Decision 87Gahap663 decided May 2, 200

1. The original judgment shall be modified as follows:

A. The Defendants jointly and severally pay to Plaintiff 1 an amount of KRW 19,41,131, KRW 18,941, KRW 131, KRW 131, KRW 3,477,99 to Plaintiff 3, and an amount of KRW 3,477,99 as well as an annual amount of KRW 5% from May 27, 1986 to September 8, 198, and an amount of KRW 25% per annum from the following day to the date of full payment.

B. Each of the plaintiffs' remaining claims is dismissed.

2. All the costs of lawsuit are divided into three parts of the first and second instances. One of them is the plaintiffs, and the remainder is the defendants' own burden.

3. The provisional execution as referred to in paragraph (1) may be effected.

The original judgment shall be modified as follows:

The Defendants shall jointly and severally pay to the Plaintiffs 1 and 2 an annual amount of KRW 29,414,042, KRW 4,831,953, and each of the above amounts to Plaintiff 3 from May 27, 1986 to the date of the sentence of the lower judgment; and the amount at the rate of KRW 25 percent per annum from the following day to the date of the full payment.

The costs of lawsuit shall be assessed against the defendants in both the first and second trials, and the declaration of provisional execution (the court revised the purport of the claim along with the filing of the lawsuit in the trial).

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

All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The costs of lawsuit are assessed against all of the plaintiffs in the first and second instances.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

In light of the above facts, Gap's evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3-4, Gap's evidence Nos. 12, 4-2 (written opinion), Gap's evidence Nos. 12-2 (written opinion), Gap's evidence Nos. 14 (written opinion) and non-party 2's testimony (except for the part which is not believed after the plaintiff Nos. 4), and the court below's testimony of non-party 2 (except for the part which is not believed later), and the whole purport of oral argument as to the defendant 1's 3-party 1's death on the same road as the above 8-party 1's death, because the non-party 4's death caused by the above death of the deceased, and the defendant 2, who is the driver of the above 1's office, was found to have a high-speed 1's death of the deceased's disease on the 1's own aftermath of 3-party 1's death on the road.

According to the above facts of recognition, there is a proximate causal relation between the death of the deceased and the injury as seen earlier due to the accident in this case, so Defendant 1 as the operator of the above vehicle, and Defendant 2 as the driver of the above vehicle, jointly and severally as the driver of the above vehicle, shall be liable to compensate for the damages suffered by the above non-party deceased and the other plaintiffs in relation

The defendants asserted that since the above deceased's claim of this case should be dismissed or dismissed in an unlawful manner, since the plaintiff received 3,00,000,000 won as compensation for damages caused by the accident of this case between the Korea Automobile Insurance Corporation which subrogated the defendants after the accident of this case and the defendant, the defendant argued that the plaintiff should receive 3,000,000 won as compensation for damages and not bring any civil action against it in the future, and therefore, the plaintiff's claim of this case should be rejected or dismissed in an unlawful manner. Thus, according to the evidence No. 1 (Agreement) presumed that the authenticity of the entire document is presumed to have been established, the above deceased's assertion that the above deceased's claim of this case should not be accepted in a different manner from the above evidence No. 1 (Agreement), since the above deceased's assertion that the above deceased's claim of this case was proved to have been made on December 3, 1986 and the Korea Automobile Insurance Corporation subrogated by the defendant No. 1, the above deceased's life cannot be accepted as the above evidence of this case.

Meanwhile, according to the above facts, the above deceased was erroneous in crossing the first line local road without permission at night, and the plaintiff's negligence in care and custody that did not prevent the above deceased's agrochemicals, and the above negligence on the part of the plaintiff was one of the causes in the occurrence of the accident of this case and the expansion of the damage, but this does not amount to the extent that the defendants are exempted from the liability for damages. However, in determining the amount, it is reasonable to set the rate of negligence of the above deceased at 30 percent in total in light of both parties' negligence.

2. Scope of liability for damages

A. Property damage of the deceased

(1) Actual income

The above evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2-1 and Nos. 9-1 and 2-1 and 2-9-2 of the deceased without dispute over the above evidence Nos. 1-2, and Gap evidence Nos. 8-1 through 8 (each photo) which may be recognized as true by the testimony of the non-party 3, and the witness of the court below and non-party 2's testimony, comprehensively taking account of the whole purport of oral arguments, the above deceased is male born on March 30, 1957 and his average life is 38.08, and the deceased's age is 29 years old and less than 38.2 years old since his graduation from the above middle school, and the deceased's career is 1-5 years old and less than 3 years old and less than 5 years old and less than 5 years old, and the deceased's age is 1-6 years old and less than 5 years old and less than 5 years old and less than 5 years old and less than 5 years old and less than 5 years old and the defendant's 1-old-1 and 4 years old.

According to the above facts of recognition, the above deceased suffered loss from loss of 23 months from the date of the accident in this case until May 2, 1988 (less than the month after carrying over to May 2, 198) of 354,755 won per month during which he/she may die from the date of the accident in this case, and for 347 months (less short of the month according to the plaintiff's calculation method) from the next day until he/she reaches the age of 60, 236,504 won [354,755 won-(354,755 won x 1/3)] of 236,504 won after deducting living expenses from the above profit in this case, it is clear that he/she will suffer loss of 5/1200 per month from the date of the accident in this case, and if he/she calculates the above amount based on the calculation method of KRW 45,529,539,7549) x 294,5397.254.75 194.7

(2) Negligence offsetting, etc.

Therefore, the above deceased's property damage caused by the accident of this case is KRW 55,468,147 of the above recognition, and when considering the above's negligence, the amount of damage that the defendants should compensate is equivalent to KRW 38,827,702 ( KRW 55,468,147, X70/100). Meanwhile, the non-party Korean Automobile Insurance Co., Ltd. who subrogated Defendant 1 paid a sum of KRW 3,215,460 to the above deceased as part of the above damages, there is no dispute between the parties, and evidence Nos. 4-1 through 7 (each deposit, evidence No. 4-5, No. 4-6 of the above evidence No. 4, No. 4-297) of the above evidence No. 4-7 (the amount overlapping with KRW 4,77 of the above evidence No. 390,979,979) of the above amount paid by the Defendants to the above deceased, the above non-party 1 who paid the above amount of KRW 297929,3979,29790.79.

B. Property damage of Plaintiff 3

(1) Loss of nursing expenses

Comprehensively taking account of the above evidence Nos. 3 and 7-1 and 2 (each statement of the above evidence Nos. 1 and 7-2 (excluding the part not trusted) of the above deceased witness Nos. 1 and the whole purport of the oral argument, the above deceased's injury was inflicted before the accident of this case, and the period of time the deceased was discharged from the hospital of Dongsung, Gangnam-gu Hospital of this case until the beginning of August 1986, and the period of medical care at home after the discharge, and the period of time the mental illness aggravated, and the period of time the plaintiff Nos. 1 and 2 (excluding the part not trusted) of the above evidence Nos. 1 and 7-1 of the above evidence Nos. 7 and the care and custody of the above deceased Nos. 1 and 7-2 of this case were sufficient to recognize that the plaintiff Nos. 1 and 9-2 of this case had no other dispute over the plaintiff Nos. 97-1 and 9-2 of this case's testimony and care.

(2) Medical expenses damages

In full view of the above Gap evidence 7-1, 2, and Gap evidence 13-1, 2 (the statement of medical expenses), and the witness non-party 2's testimony (except the part not trusted in the above), and the whole purport of the oral argument, it can be acknowledged that the plaintiff 3 spent 26,800 won in the balance of the medical expenses in the above deceased's Gangnam Hospital, 167,280 won in the treatment expenses in the Gangnam Hospital, and 421,770 won in the treatment expenses in the National Mental Hospital, and there is no counter-proof otherwise.

(3) Therefore, Plaintiff 3’s property damage caused by the instant accident is KRW 3,539,942 (2,92 + 26,800 + 167,280 + 421,770 + (2,4777,959 (3,539,942 + 70/100) plus the amount of each of the above recognition. However, considering the negligence of the above deceased, it is reasonable to determine the amount to be compensated by the Defendants.

(c) Compensation money;

In light of the empirical rule, the above deceased and the plaintiffs who suffered considerable mental pain as well as the above deceased as they died in the accident of this case, and the facts that the above deceased suffered considerable mental pain. Considering the deceased and the plaintiffs' age, family relations, the circumstances and result of the accident of this case, and all other circumstances revealed in the arguments of this case, it is reasonable that the Defendants jointly and severally pay 1,50,000 won to the above deceased, and 1,500,000 won to the plaintiff 1, and 2, and 3 respectively.

3. Inheritance relationship; and

Therefore, the amount that the Defendants are liable to compensate for to the deceased is KRW 35,882,263 in total of KRW 32,882,263 in property damage and KRW 3,000 in consolation money. However, as seen earlier by the deceased, the amount of KRW 17,941,131 ( KRW 35,882,263 x 1/2) was inherited to the Plaintiff 1 and 2, who was his wife.

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendants jointly and severally set forth in 19,441,131 won (17,941,131 won + 1,500,000 won) and 18,941,131 won (17,941,131 won + 1,000), and 3,477,959 won (2,47,959 won + 1,000,000 won) to the plaintiff 3, as well as 3,477,959 won (2,47,959 won + 1,000,000 won) to the plaintiff 1, and as such, it is reasonable for the defendants to resist the scope of liability for damages of this case from May 27, 1987 to September 8, 1988, the plaintiff 2 to claim for a change of provisional execution pursuant to Article 9 of the Civil Procedure Act to be made within the limit of 9% per annum and 25% per annum per annum per annum per annum per annum.

Judges Shin Sung-sung (Presiding Judge) (Presiding Judge) Kim Yong-ju