In relation to accidents caused by a person who has no driver's license by violating an agreement between a motor vehicle lessee and a rental business operator to drive a leased motor vehicle, cases where the rental business operator's control over operation and operating profit is recognized.

If it cannot be denied that a car rental business operator still controls the human resources of a lessee and physical management of a car even after renting the car in accordance with a car rental agreement, the case holding that the car rental business operator had a direct and present relationship between the rental business operator and the lessee with respect to the car, and even if the lessee violated the agreement with the rental business operator and caused a third party who has no driver's license at the time of the accident to drive the car, it cannot be deemed that the direct and present relationship between the rental business operator and the lessee with respect to the car existing between the rental business operator and the lessee does not cut down. However, it is reasonable to view that the car rental business operator had an indirect and potential control over the operation of the car through a third party without the driver's license, and thus, the car rental business operator had the operating control and the profits of the vehicle at the time of the accident.

Article 3 of the Guarantee of Automobile Accident Compensation Act

Supreme Court Decision 91Da3932 delivered on April 12, 1991 (Gong1991, 1380) Supreme Court Decision 91Da8418 delivered on July 12, 1991 (Gong1991, 2152)

Park Tae-il et al. (Attorney Go-su, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant Limited Partnership Company

Seoul District Court Decision 96Na36141 delivered on February 13, 1997

Supreme Court Decision 97Da12891 delivered on June 27, 1997

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff Park Jong-il the amount of 47,650,496 won, gold 2,000,000 won to the plaintiff Lee Jong-tae, and the amount of 5% per annum from September 27, 1995 to July 19, 196, and the amount of 25% per annum from July 20, 1996 to the full payment date.

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

3. The costs of lawsuit are divided into three parts, one of which is the plaintiffs, and the other is the defendant's own burden.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff Park Tae-il an amount of 65,939,047 won, gold 64,439,047 won, gold 1,00,000 won, and each of the above amounts, from September 27, 1995 to the date of this decision, to the date of this decision, 5% per annum, and 25% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

A. Grounds for liability

(1) At around 06:30 on September 27, 1995, Nonparty 1 driven a car owned by the Defendant (vehicle number omitted) and proceeded on the top of the upper parallel line of 88 km from the starting point of the Gyeong-si Office Seoul, Seoul, at the speed of about 100km to Seoul, at the speed of about 100km. Nonparty 1 entered the river to the tent rest area located on the right side of the said car and parked on the right side of the said car, and received the back portion of the freight vehicle, which was parked in the said stop parking lot on the right side of the said vehicle, and caused the death of October 6 of the same year by Nonparty 1, who was on the top of the 8A669 freight vehicle, due to the shock.

(2) The Plaintiff Park Tae-il and Lee Jong-ok are the parents of the deceased, and the Plaintiff Park Jong-ok are the births of the deceased.

(3) According to the above facts, the defendant is liable to compensate for all damages suffered by the deceased and the plaintiffs due to the above accident as an operator of the car at issue.

[Evidence] Evidence Nos. 1 through 4, Evidence No. 7-4 to 25, and the whole purport of the pleading

B. Judgment on the defendant's defense

(1) Defendant’s defense

The Defendant, as a car, agreed with the above non-party 2 not to allow the above car to be driven by the third party other than the above non-party 2 and the non-party 2. The above non-party 2 violated the above agreement and let the above non-party 1, who did not have a driver's license, to drive the above car, and the accident of this case occurred, the Defendant lost a driver's control over the above car at the time of the accident. Thus, the Defendant asserted that the above non-party 2 was not liable for damages suffered by the deceased and the plaintiffs due to the accident of this case.

(2) Facts admitted in relation to the defendant's defense

(A) At around 21:30 on September 26, 1995, the Defendant: (a) as a car rental business operator, lent the said car to Nonparty 2 from the time of the lease to 21:30 on the following day; (b) from the time of the lease to 70,000 won, the lessee shall pay the above car fee in advance; (c) the lessee shall not be able to use or sublet the said car for commercial transport; (d) the lessee shall not be able to use or sublet it to any third party or person without a driver’s license; (e) the lessee shall use the said car for his duty of due care as a good manager; and (e) the lessee shall bear the repair cost in the event the said car has broken out due to the lessee’s fault; and (e) the lessee shall be liable for damages if the lessee violates the said agreement or causes damages to the Defendant or a third party due to the lessee’s fault.

(B) The above non-party 2 borrowed the above vehicle from the defendant and let the above non-party 1 drive the above vehicle without a driver's license, and the above non-party 1 driven the above vehicle as seen above, and the accident of this case occurred while driving the above vehicle.

[Evidence] Evidence No. 7-20, No. 8, Eul-3, the whole purport of oral argument

(3) Determination

According to the above facts, the defendant cannot be denied the fact that he still manages the lessee's human resources and physical management of the above vehicle even after renting the above vehicle in accordance with the above agreement. Thus, the defendant and the above non-party 2 have a direct and present relationship between the defendant and the above non-party 2 with respect to the above vehicle. Even if the above non-party 2 violated the agreement between the defendant and the non-party 2, which did not have a driver's license at the time of the accident, caused the above non-party 1 to drive the above vehicle, the defendant's direct and present relationship with the above non-party 2 with the above non-party 2, who is the owner of the above vehicle, and the lessee of the above vehicle, can not be deemed to be severed. However, it is reasonable to view that the defendant had an indirect and potential control over the operation of the above vehicle through the above non-party 1, and therefore the defendant had an indirect and potential control over the operation of the above vehicle at the time of the accident, the defendant's defense is without merit.

C. Limitation on liability

According to the above evidence and evidence No. 7-1 to No. 4, the above deceased was a relative of the above non-party No. 1, and play together with eight friendships including the above non-party No. 1 on the day immediately before the accident occurred, and the above deceased was playing in Seoul around the new wall time of the accident, and the above non-party No. 1 knew that the above non-party No. 1 did not have a driver's license, three friendlys on the top of the above car operated by the above non-party No. 1, and the other friendlys on the top of the above car No. 1, and the other friendly four son was faced with the accident in Seoul by using other vehicles. Thus, the above deceased's share of the operating profit of the above car No. 1 and the above non-party No. 4 on the part of the above non-party No. 1 on the part of the above non-party No. 1 on the part of the non-party No. 1 on the ground that it was contrary to the purport of the compensation system for damages.

2. Scope of damages.

(a) Actual income:

The above deceased's loss of lost income equivalent to the monetary total appraised value of the capacity to operate as a result of the instant accident is KRW 112,168,320.

This is based on the following (1) the outcome calculated at the present price at the time of the instant accident according to the reduction rate of 5/12 per annum per month based on the facts of recognition and evaluation as follows:

(1) Facts of recognition and evaluation

(A) Gender: Date of birth of female: February 9, 1978

Age at the time of an accident: 17 years of age and 7 years of age: 52.02

(B) Living base and urban daily wage: Seoul, the deceased’s living base at the time of the instant accident. The urban daily wage of the ordinary worker at the time of the closing of the instant argument is KRW 31,866 per day.

(c) Cost of living: 1/3 of revenues (the fact that there is no dispute).

(d) The number of monthly operation days and operation period: The 22th day of each month and the 60 years of age (the fact that there is no dispute and the rule of experience);

[Evidence] Evidence Nos. 1 and 5, and the purport of the first half of the 95 year after the issuance of the Korea Construction Association established in this Court, a report on the actual status of construction business, and the whole purport of the pleading

(2) mountain.

A) Between the season (less than a month, less than a month);

451 months from the time the deceased becomes an adult until he/she reaches the age of 60, the maximum working age.

B) Gyeyang mountain (less than KRW 100,000).

31,866 won x 22 】 22 】 2/3 x 240 x 112,168,320 won (limited to 240 won by the head of the premium in order to prevent excessive compensation)

(b) Funeral expenses.

Ender: Plaintiff Park Tae-il

Amount of gold: 1,500,000 won (in the absence of any dispute)

C. Limitation on liability

(1) Liability ratio: 60% (see the above 1-(c))

(2) mountain.

(A) The deceased

Daily income: 112,168,320 won x 60/100 = gold 67,300,992

(B) Funeral expenses: Funeral expenses: KRW 1,500,000 ¡¿ 60/100 = gold KRW 900,000.

(d) Condolence money;

(1) Reasons for consideration: Ghana, family relations, property and level of education, circumstances and results of the accident, and other various circumstances shown in the pleadings of this case.

(2) The amount determined;

Deceased: 20,000,000 won

Plaintiff Park Tae-il, the same e-mail: 4,000,000 won per piece of gold

Plaintiff Park Jong-sung: 2,000,000 won

(f) Inheritance relationship;

(1) The heir of the deceased’s property: the Plaintiff’s stuff, the same e-mail;

(2) Inheritance amount;

The heir of the above property = 43,650,496 won = [3,00,992 won + 20,000,000 won + 1/2];

【Evidence No. 1】

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant shall pay 47,650,496 won per annum under the Civil Act from September 27, 1995 to the date of this judgment, 47,650,496 won £« funeral expenses + 900,000,000 won £« funeral expenses + 47,650,496 won per annum to the plaintiff Lee Jong-ok and 47,650,496 won per annum ( + 43,650,496 won per annum + 4,000,000 won per annum in inheritance), and 2,000,000 won per annum to the plaintiff Park Jong-sik and each of the above amounts, respectively, shall be dismissed within the scope of 5% per annum under the Civil Act, from July 20, 1996 to the date of this judgment. The remaining claims for delay damages shall be made within the scope of 25% per annum per annum as stipulated under the Special Act on the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings.

Judge Dog Charter