(a) Whether measures are taken based on increased wages after the Deceased's actual benefit was accident (affirmative) who worked for a company that has engaged in wage figures each year in accordance with the rules of employment and collective agreement (affirmative);

B. Whether the consolation benefits received by the deceased victim’s bereaved family member should be deducted from the amount of damages (negative)

(a) The measures taken to calculate the lost profit of the deceased in accordance with the wages increased by the collective agreement concluded after the accident, on the ground that the wage of the deceased working for a company that has held wage figures each year as a result of collective bargaining and each collective agreement are likely to increase the number of wages, and that is reasonable in calculating the lost profit of the deceased in accordance with the wages increased by the collective agreement concluded after the accident.

B. We affirm the measure that the Plaintiffs, the bereaved family members of the deceased victim, did not deduct the consolation benefits received from the Defendant from the property damages.

Articles 763 and 393 of the Civil Act

A. Supreme Court en banc Decision 88Meu6761 delivered on December 26, 1989 (Gong1990, 350) (Gong1990, 1784 delivered on July 24, 1990) (Gong1990, 1784 delivered on November 13, 1990) 71Da1158 delivered on July 27, 197 (Gong1991, 97)

Jung-young et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Attorney Lee Sung-hoon et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Busan High Court Decision 90Na2239 delivered on July 19, 1990

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

1. We examine the first ground for appeal by the defendant's attorney.

Examining the evidence admitted by the court below based on the records, the rules of employment and collective agreement of the non-party shipbuilding company, which was employed by the non-party trust assistance, are required to determine wage figures each year through collective bargaining, and accordingly, the above deceased has been paid wages each year. Since it is acknowledged that the above deceased was an on-site technician by collective agreement without a rise in salary as an on-site technician, it is highly probable that the above deceased's wage would be increased for a long time, and thus, it is acceptable to the court below's decision that calculated the lost profit of the above deceased according to the wage raised by the collective agreement in 190 and the wage agreement in 190 concluded after the accident, and there is no error of law such as misunderstanding of legal principles or violation of judicial precedents.

2. We examine the second ground for appeal.

In light of the records, the court below is justified in finding that the amount received by the plaintiffs who are the bereaved family members of the victim's non-party aid from the defendant was received as consolation money and did not deduct the amount from the property damage compensation amount, and there is no violation of the rules of evidence or misapprehension of the legal principles,

3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Kim Sang-won (Presiding Justice) Lee Jong-won (Presiding Justice)