A. Requirements to recognize the maximum working age as over 55 years of age

B. Whether to recognize the maximum working age of the Korean traditional musicist as up to 70 years of age

A. Even if a court can recognize the maximum working age with free conviction by taking into account the individual individual’s career, age, occupation, health condition, and other various circumstances, given that the period during which a healthy person can work for general physical labor is ordinarily 55 years of age, the court should not examine and determine special circumstances that can serve as the basis for setting the maximum working age differently from ordinary cases.

B. Even if it is different from that of the ordinary physical training that is engaged in simple labor, it is necessary to do so, so it is difficult to do so in light of the following circumstances: (a) physical core force, pulmonal vitality, sexual impulse, etc.; (b) even if it is in the absence of common labor capacity and even if it is reduced by 20 percent of the general labor capacity, it is difficult to do so; (c) so, in order to recognize that the activities are capable of being performed as the ordinary labor ability by the age of 55 and above 70, since it is generally recognized that the activities are not complete, and even if it is reduced by 20 percent of the general labor capacity, it is difficult to see that the Plaintiff can naturally act as the ordinary physical training person by the age of 70 until 70, the remaining life of the Plaintiff is able to act as the ordinary physical training person; (d) therefore, (e) the distribution ratio of each age and the increase or decrease in the operation ratio of the people who are engaged in the traditional physical training by the age of 70, and its physical reasons should be determined specifically by the time limit of 70.

Article 763 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 81Meu86 Decided December 8, 1981

[Judgment of the court below]

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 3 others

Seoul High Court Decision 81Na2232 delivered on May 4, 1982

Of the part of the judgment below against the defendant, the part ordering the payment of KRW 109,070,718 as property damage and delay damages therefor shall be reversed, and this part of the case shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The defendant's remaining appeals (in part) are dismissed.

The costs of appeal concerning the dismissal of an appeal above shall be borne by the defendant.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. According to the evidence of the court below, if the plaintiff was physically healthy women who were born at the time of the above 0th anniversary of the age of 70, and the average remaining life is 38 years, and around May 1956, he continued to join the Korean Association of Meritorious and to engage in 1961 as regular members of the city of 00, while continuing to engage in the business of collecting human resources from the above non-party 1, who is a human resource of 00, while continuing to engage in the business of collecting human resources from the above non-party 7, the plaintiff was unable to obtain the above 0th anniversary of the above 7th anniversary of the age of 0, the plaintiff was unable to obtain the above 7th anniversary of the above 7th anniversary of the age of 0, the non-party 2, the non-party 3, the non-party 4, and the non-party 2, the non-party 4, and the non-party 3, the non-party 5th of the above 7th day after the accident.

2. However, even if the court below acknowledged the maximum working age as the maximum working age of Nonparty 1 as the maximum working age by the time limit of 7 years in a specific case, taking into account the career, age, occupation, health condition of each person and other various circumstances, it shall be our empirical rule that the healthy person can work for general physical labor by the time limit of 55 years, and thus, if recognizing the maximum working age differently from the above general case, it shall not be determined without examining the special circumstances that may serve as the basis for the above maximum working age (see Supreme Court Decision 81Meu86, Dec. 8, 1981). Accordingly, according to the records in this case, even if it is different from the ordinary physical labor, it is possible for the Plaintiff to work for the time limit of 7 years old and above, and thus, it is possible for the healthy person to work for the time limit of 7 years old and above as the witness of the ordinary physical labor, and thus, it should be determined that the physical activity of Nonparty 1, who is the maximum working age of 7 years in a certain condition.

3. The defendant's appeal does not contain any indication in the grounds of appeal as to the remaining parts of the defendant's appeal excluding the above property damage portion. Thus, this part cannot be exempted from dismissal of appeal.

4. Therefore, among the part against the defendant in the judgment of the court below, the part ordering the payment of 109,070,718 won and damages for delay thereof as property damage shall be reversed, and this part shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court which is the court below, and the appeal against the remaining part of the defendant shall be dismissed, and the costs of appeal as to the dismissal of the appeal shall be borne by the defendant, and it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Chang-chul (Presiding Justice)