(a) The calculation standard for the opening cost in a case where a person needs to obtain assistance of a nursingman for his life due to a aftermath disability caused by an accident;

B. The nature of money received at the time of agreement in the course of investigation or criminal trial

(a) the opening costs for physically handicapped persons due to an accident that require the assistance of a nursing person during their life should be calculated on the basis of the total daily wages, not on the basis of the amount corresponding to the hours actually engaged in opening a nursing day, but on the basis of the number of daily wages.

B. In the course of the investigation or criminal trial against the perpetrator of the tort, it is reasonable to view that the amount was paid as part of the damage compensation (property damage) unless there are circumstances, such as clearly stating that the amount received as at the time of the agreement is paid as material name, in case the victim agreed that the perpetrator would not be punished against the perpetrator by receiving the money under the pretext of agreement from the perpetrator.

Article 763 of the Civil Act

A. Supreme Court Decision 82Meu1079 Decided Nov. 23, 1982, Supreme Court Decision 86Meu2366 Decided February 24, 1987, Supreme Court Decision 87Meu178 Decided July 7, 1987

[Judgment of the court below]

[Defendant-Appellee] Attorney Jeon Jong-gu, Counsel for defendant-appellee

Seoul High Court Decision 87Na1948 delivered on November 19, 1987

The part of the judgment of the court below against the plaintiff regarding the opening expenses shall be reversed, and that part of the case shall be remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The plaintiff's remaining appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal dismissed shall be assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. Examining the judgment below, the court below held that the plaintiff's material tallyman or urban ordinary workers of the defendant company lost 80% of the work ability of the defendant company as the material tallyman or urban ordinary workers due to the left-hand side of the plaintiff's employee, and that the plaintiff cannot replace the kismoter with the kismoter because it is entirely impossible to manage the vegetative due to the vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative vegetative veget veget veget veget veget veget veget veget veget veget veget veget veget veget veget veget ve.

However, even though it is reasonable to calculate the total amount of daily daily wages, it is reasonable not to recognize only the amount corresponding to the hours of opening a day, but also to calculate the number of the physically handicapped persons, such as the Plaintiff, who should receive assistance from the guardian during their life due to the aftermathy disability, such as the advanced amount of room gold and variable gold suffered from the accident in this case, (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 87Meu178, Jul. 7, 1987; Supreme Court Decision 86Meu2366, Feb. 24, 1987; 82Meu1079, Nov. 23, 1982). The court below rejected the above physical appraisal result, etc. requiring the opening of the day without any reasonable basis, and it cannot be said that the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the calculation of opening expenses, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

There is reason to discuss.

2. In the course of the investigation or criminal trial against the perpetrator of the tort, where the victim agreed that the perpetrator would not be punished for the perpetrator, it shall be reasonable to view that the amount was paid as part of the damage compensation (property damage) unless there are circumstances such as ordering that the amount received as agreed money from the perpetrator would be paid as compensation for damages, in particular, as ordered.

In this regard, in this case where the perpetrator is liable to the defendant who is the employer of the perpetrator, the court below's action is just and there is no error of law such as the theory of lawsuit, since the plaintiff's agreed amount of KRW 7,90,000 received from the family shipping transfer shall be considered as compensation for property damage and deducted from the plaintiff's property damage compensation of this case.

3. Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against the plaintiff regarding the nursing costs is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below. The remaining appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal against the dismissed appeal are assessed against the plaintiff. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating

Justices Lee Jin-hee (Presiding Justice)