1. The judgment of the court of first instance against the defendant exceeding the following amount ordered to be paid.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the liability for damages is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, citing this as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. In addition to the matters stated below within the scope of liability for damages, each corresponding item of the Schedule of Calculation of Compensation for Damages shall be as follows, and in principle, the period for the convenience of calculation shall be calculated on a monthly basis, but less than the last month and less than KRW 1 shall be discarded.

The calculation of the current value at the time of the accident shall be based on the reduction rate of 5/12 percent per month to deduct the interim interest.

In addition, it is rejected that the parties' arguments are not stated separately.

In light of the fact that the Plaintiff, at the time of the instant accident, was engaged in leasing business, collection of salt, transportation of work, and collection of gold, etc., the Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff could have obtained urban daily wage for three years from the time of the instant accident.

However, it is insufficient to acknowledge that there was a revenue that can be recognized as a lost income at the time of the instant accident only with the descriptions of Gap evidence Nos. 8 through 10 remaining 65 years old at the time of the instant accident, and there is no other evidence to prove otherwise.

Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion of lost income based on the premise that the maximum working age remains still remains is groundless, and thus, Plaintiff A’s loss rate of labor ability cannot be determined separately.

3) According to the result of the physical appraisal commission to the Samsung Seoul Hospital Head of this court and the fact-finding inquiry conducted on July 14, 2017, the appraisal was presumed to have been presumed to have been conducted from February 5, 2012, which was the date of the instant accident, 5.49 years from February 5, 2012 (the life expectancy of the ordinary person as of the date of the accident 21.98 x 25% from the date of the accident 21.98 x 25% from the ordinary person as of the date of the accident).

However, the above life expectancy has expired.