logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.07.26 2018나81228
손해배상(자)
Text

1. According to the amendment of the purport of the claim in the trial, the judgment of the first instance is modified as follows.

Defendant:

A. The plaintiff.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition or dismissal as follows, and thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Part 14 added or added is as follows: "The same shall apply to each of the following corresponding items" in the third 14th 14th of the judgment of the court of first instance. "The following items shall be the same as the annexed damages calculation table."

The third 18 statements in the judgment of the first instance shall be added to the 18th 18 statements [based on recognition]. “each statement in the 5th 8 evidence (including each number).”

The fourth to nine parallels in the judgment of the court of first instance shall be conducted as follows.

“2) On the basis of the calculation of the lost income and operating period, Plaintiff A asserted that Plaintiff A obtained KRW 5,466,050, an average income for the three immediately preceding months immediately preceding the instant accident while serving as an employee or employee of L Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “L”). Meanwhile, the Defendant asserts that it should be calculated on the basis of statistical income or urban daily wage of employees engaged in external sales business income.

If we look at the overall purport of the argument as a result of the fact inquiry about L of the first instance court, the following facts can be acknowledged. The first instance court's reply to the order to submit tax information on South-North Jeju Island alone lacks the following facts, and there is no counter-proof otherwise.

As of January 1, 2009, the above Plaintiff entrusted L with the installation and return of water purifiers in Songpa-gu and A/S services, etc. and received fees every month from deducting service tools, parts, costs, and withholding amount from L as business income income, from the status of business income income earner every month.

The amount of commission received from L for about four years from July 2012 to July 2016 from which the instant accident occurred is replaced by the details and substitution of the business income reported by L to the said Plaintiff.

arrow