Attorney Fees and Compensation

In a lawsuit seeking damages against a tortfeasor, a person who has suffered damages due to a tort may delegate a lawsuit to an attorney-at-law. However, under the current legal system that does not enforce the attorney-at-law's duty to seek damages for damages, it is interpreted that the case must be delegated to an attorney-at-law and there is a need to assist with professional knowledge in the law. In other cases, it is difficult to view that the amount can be within the scope of proximate causal relation arising from a tort as a matter of course.

Article 750 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 72Da265 delivered on April 20, 1972 (Supreme Court Decision 10068 delivered on April 20, 197, Supreme Court Decision 200Do211 delivered on June 20, 200)

Plaintiff 1 and 10 others

Korea

Seoul Central District Court (69A7161) in the first instance trial (Supreme Court Decision 69Da7161)

1. Of the parts against the defendant in the original judgment, the part ordering payment of the plaintiff 2 from September 27, 1968 to September 27, 1968 and the part ordering payment from September 27, 1968 to the above full portion shall be revoked and the plaintiff's claim as to that part shall be dismissed.

2. All remaining appeals by the Defendant are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit shall be divided into two parts through the first and second trials, and they shall be borne by each one half of the plaintiffs and the defendants.

4. A provisional execution may be carried out only two-thirds of each in the original judgment which has not been revoked under the above paragraph (1).

The plaintiff et al.'s attorney shall pay to the plaintiff 1 an amount of 150,00 won, 3, 4, and 5 an amount of 819,188 won, 6, 7, and 8 respectively, to the plaintiff 2 from 150,000 won, 5% per annum from September 27, 1968 to 323,4, and 5% per annum.

The court costs are assessed against the defendant. The defendant is assessed against the plaintiff 1,50,00 won, 531,624 won, 531,624 won, 6, 7, and 8 respectively to the plaintiff 2, 304,416 won, 227,208 won, 18,604 won, 188,604 won, 9, and 10 won to the plaintiff 11, and 5 percent of the annual amount from September 27, 1968 to the above full payment system.

It is called that the costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

The defendant litigation performer shall revoke the part against the defendant in the original judgment and dismiss the plaintiff's claim on that part.

All the costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiff et al.

This part of the reasoning for a party member's explanation is the same as the statement of reasons indicated in each corresponding column of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the part concerning the attorney fees among the plaintiff 2's claim for damages, which rejected the deceased non-party 1's claim on the loss of expected import, and the remaining original judgment except for the part concerning the attorney fees among the claims for damages by the plaintiff 2.

In addition, among the original judgment cited by the witness non-party 2, the part stated that the average monthly living cost of the deceased non-party 1 was KRW 3,000 and that the plaintiff 2 paid KRW 50,000 as funeral expenses of the deceased was paid by the deceased non-party 1, the monthly average living cost of the deceased non-party 1 was KRW 3,00,000, and the fact that the plaintiff 2 paid KRW 50,000 as funeral expenses of the deceased non-party 2 was changed to the effect that there is no dispute between the parties.

Furthermore, we examine the plaintiff 2's claim for damages, and since the plaintiff 2 delegated the lawsuit to Go Young-gu and paid 100,000 won to Go Young-gu as of June 27, 1969 when filing the plaintiff 2's claim for damages, the above amount is the damages suffered by the plaintiff 2 due to the tort. However, the defendant may delegate the lawsuit to the attorney in order to seek damages against the perpetrator. However, under the current law that does not follow the mandatory lawyer's duty of attorney in order to delegate the case to the attorney and seek damages against the perpetrator, it is hard to view that the plaintiff 2 can be seen that the plaintiff 2 arbitrarily delegated the case to the attorney in question and it is difficult to prove that the plaintiff 2 had a duty of assistance of expertise in the law. Thus, it can be seen that the plaintiff 2 had a duty to prove that the plaintiff 2 had a duty to seek damages from the tort in this case. Thus, it can be seen that the plaintiff 2 had a duty to prove that the plaintiff 2 had a duty of attorney's knowledge in this case.

Therefore, the defendant shall dismiss the plaintiff 2 with the above-mentioned inherited property amounting to KRW 91,576, funeral expenses amounting to KRW 50,00, and KRW 100,000, and KRW 241,576, and KRW 30,525, and KRW 150,000, total inherited property amounting to KRW 180,525, KRW 61,051, and KRW 100,000, and KRW 160,000, and KRW 9,000, KRW 161,051, and KRW 9,000, KRW 30,000, KRW 10,525, and KRW 9,000, KRW 10,000, KRW 30,525, and KRW 130,525, KRW 16,015, and KRW 20,000, KRW 16,525,015, respectively.

Judges Kim Jong-nam (Presiding Judge)