Plaintiff (Law Firm Gyeong & Yang, Attorneys Lee Gyeong-hwan et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

China International Aeronautical Corporation (Law Firm Squa, Attorneys Gyeong-ok et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

October 2, 2007

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2003Gahap13708 Delivered on October 27, 2006

1.Paragraph 1 and 2 of the judgment of the court of first instance, including the Plaintiff’s claim expanded in the trial room, shall be modified as follows:

A. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 2,063,327,802 and the amount of KRW 1,940,586,366 out of the above amount from April 15, 2002 to October 27, 2006; the remaining KRW 122,741,436 per annum until December 4, 2007; and the amount calculated by applying each ratio of 20% per annum from the following day to the full payment date.

B. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

2. The total costs of the lawsuit shall be four-minutes, and such three-minutes shall be borne by the plaintiff, and the remainder by the defendant respectively.

3. Paragraph 1(a) of this Article may be provisionally executed.

1. Purport of claim

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff the amount of KRW 8,095,636,793 and the amount of KRW 7,586,223,874 from April 15, 2002 to the delivery date of the complaint of this case, the remainder of KRW 509,412,919 to the delivery date of the complaint of this case, the amount of KRW 6% per annum from April 15, 2002 to May 7, 2007, and the amount calculated by the rate of KRW 20% per annum from the next day to the full payment date (the extension of the claim amount and damages rate in the trial).

2. Purport of appeal

A. The plaintiff

(1) The part against the plaintiff in the judgment of the first instance shall be revoked.

Luxembourg The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 5,645,637,508 won, and 6% per annum from April 15, 2002 to the delivery date of the complaint of this case, and 20% per annum from the next day to the full payment date.

B. Defendant

Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part of the judgment against the defendant ordering payment exceeding the amount calculated by the ratio of 5% per annum from April 15, 2002 to the ruling of the court of first instance, and the part against the defendant ordering payment exceeding the amount calculated by the ratio of 20% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment, shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

1. Basic facts

This Court's reasoning is the same as the entry of the second to third to 11 of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this Court's reasoning is acceptable in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Applicable Acts;

In this case, the laws of the Republic of Korea are applied in accordance with Article 32 of the Private International Law, claiming compensation for damages due to nonperformance of obligations or tort under the Aviation Passenger Transport Contract in respect of the accident of this case occurred within the territory of

3. Occurrence of liability for damages;

According to the above facts, the defendant, a carrier under the air transport contract of this case, shall be liable for damages sustained by the deceased and their mother or mother, who died of the accident of this case while on board the aircraft of this case due to non-performance of obligation under the above transport contract of this case, and the plaintiff, his mother or mother, who was his agent, had taken all necessary measures to prevent the occurrence of the accident of this case or could not take such measures.

4. Scope of damages.

(a) Actual income:

(i) the deceased non-party 1

The deceased's lost income is KRW 1,523,081,591 calculated at the present price of April 15, 2002, which was at the time of death, in accordance with the Hofmanial Calculation Act, which deducts intermediary interest by 5/12% per month, such as listed in the attached Table 1 for Calculation of Compensation for Damages, based on the following facts:

㈎ 인정사실

(1) Gender: Women.

Date of birth: omitted

Age at the time of accident: 36 years of age and 7 months;

Name of rental: 38.93

(2) Occupation and actual income status.

The deceased non-party 1 opened and operated a hospital from around 1992 to around the time of the accident of this case with the trade name "non-party 1 dental clinic".

(3) Degree of import

As a result of the appraisal of the income of Nonparty 2 of the first instance trial, the Plaintiff claimed that KRW 39,788,938, which was calculated on the basis of the amount calculated by subtracting capital income of KRW 479,706,262, which was recognized as income of the deceased in 201, is the monthly income of the deceased, and thus, the evidence as shown in the Plaintiff’s argument is examined. The evidence reveals that the Plaintiff’s assertion is consistent with each of the entries of KRW 26-1, 3, 4, and 6, and the part of the appraisal of Nonparty 2 of the first instance trial, who is the accounting corporation (excluding each part accepted by the first instance court) and that of Nonparty 2 of the first instance trial, who is the same three-dimensional accounting corporation as that of Nonparty 5, who was sworn at the examination date of the appraiser at the first instance trial,

First, according to Gap evidence Nos. 4 and 6, the revenue amount reported to the tax office under the name of the deceased non-party 1 from 1998 to 2002 and its income amount are as listed in the following attached Table. The income amount reported to the tax office in 2001 and 2002 after the deceased non-party 1's death is about 8 times as much as the income was reported by the deceased non-party 1 from 1998 to 2000. However, in light of the plaintiff's assertion that the deceased non-party 1 increased the scale of business by expanding the number of employment before and after the year 201 and increased the number of times the above high value-added business, the above increase in the number of times the above revenue amount, and the above increase in the tax office's income amount, the amount reported to the tax office's tax office's income in 2001 and 2002, and it is not sufficient to acknowledge the amount reported to the non-party 1 and 201.6.5.

Next, each statement of Gap evidence 26 No. 26-1 through 3 is based on the trade books, treatment sets, etc. prepared by the deceased non-party 1. However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that all the amount of medical treatment set forth in the medical table was actually paid in the pertinent year. However, according to the statement of evidence No. 26-1, most of the amount of medical treatment set forth in the medical table was paid in cash (360,064,300 out of total 393,772,700 won, total 531,132,200 won, total 434,40,300 out of total 531,132,200 won, and total 639,368,740 won out of total 639,368,740 won, and the cash revenues exceeding 70% of total amount of revenue per se, it is difficult to confirm that they were paid in installments between the hospital and the head of the Tong.

Finally, the above non-party 2's partial appraisal results also include the income details of the deceased non-party 1 calculated on the basis of the diagnosis set and card transaction details, health insurance payment details, deposit transaction details, trade books, etc. However, the non-party 2 himself/herself has a considerable limit in the appraisal result due to the difference between the accounting records and evidence subject to appraisal, the discrepancy between the accounting records and evidence, the lack of evidence, and the impossibility of an ambassador with the real financial data. The diagnosis amount of the diagnosis set may be different from the actual income, such as the actual deposit after the diagnosis or the refund or the intentional omission, and it is also stated that the said appraisal results are based on the presumption for the shortage of other data.

Otherwise, the descriptions of Gap evidence 8, 12 through 14, 16 through 19, 24, 25, and 28 through 33 (including paper numbers) are insufficient to recognize the income amount as alleged by the plaintiff.

Thus, the amount of income of the deceased non-party 1 is inevitable to deduct the contributed amount of capital invested by the deceased non-party 1 on the basis of the income amount in 2000 that was reported before the deceased non-party 1 died. According to the part of the appraisal result (excluding the part not believed above) by the non-party 2, the amount of capital invested by the deceased non-party 1 is 435,046,000 won (=the value of the land and building 278,000,000 + medical device 107,100,000 + 31,846,000 won + 31,00,000 won + 18,846,000 won + the interest rate of one-year fixed deposit in commercial banks as of the date of the accident in this case. Ultimately, the amount of income of the deceased non-party 1 is 10,802,400,400 ±640,405 ±6005 ±6405 】

[Attachment] The reported income amount by the deceased non-party 1

Income amount for the calendar year of 66,379,959, 118,707,492 150,946,700 150,700 533,449,068 2002 435,636,168 202

(unit: source)

(4) Operating period: until August 17, 2030, when he reaches 65 years of age.

㈏ 생계비 : 소득액의 1/3(경험칙, 이에 대하여 원고는 월소득이 4,000만 원 정도에 이르는 망 소외 1과 같은 고소득자의 경우 그 생계비를 소득의 16.1% 정도로 보아야 한다고 주장하나, 위 망인의 월소득을 10,802,453원으로 봄은 앞서 인정한 바와 같고, 갑 제27, 28호증의 각 기재만으로는 생계비 비율에 관한 위 주장을 인정하기에 부족하다).

㈐ 계산 : 1,523,081,591원 (별지 손해배상액 계산표 1 참조)

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 6 and 13-1 of evidence Nos. 13, part of the appraisal result of the first instance trial appraiser Nos. 2 (excluding part not trusted in the foregoing), the purport of the whole pleadings

Shed Nonparty 3

The deceased's lost income is 138,441,466 won calculated at the present price of April 15, 2002, which was at the time of death, in accordance with the Franmanial Calculation Act, which deducts intermediary interest by 5/12% per month, such as the attached Table 2 of the Compensation Calculation Table, based on the following facts:

㈎ 인정사실

(1) Gender: Male

Date of birth: omitted

Age at the time of accident: 5 years of age and 8 months;

Name of rental: 68.96

(2) Job and actual income: 1,215,544 won per month of urban daily wage (==5,252 won 】 22 days)

(3) Operating period: From July 22, 2016, when he/she reaches the age of 20 to July 22, 2016, the period of military service plus two years and two months, from September 22, 2018 to July 21, 2056, he/she reaches the age of 60.

㈏ 생계비 : 소득액의 1/3 (경험칙)

㈐ 계산 : 138,441,466원 (별지 손해배상액 계산표2 참조)

[Evidence Evidence] No. 35-1 and No. 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

【Mad Nonparty 4

The deceased's lost income is 132,804,745 won calculated at the present price of April 15, 2002, which was at the time of death, in accordance with the Franmanial Calculation Act, which deducts intermediary interest by 5/12% per month, such as the entry in the attached Table 3 of the Compensation Calculation Table, based on the following facts:

㈎ 인정사실

(1) Gender: Male

Date of birth: omitted

Age at the time of accident: 3 years of age and 6 months;

Name of rental: 70.91

(2) Job and actual income: 1,215,544 won per month of urban daily wage (==5,252 won 】 22 days)

(3) Operating period: From October 2, 2018 to October 2, 2018, the period of military service plus two years and two months, from December 2, 2020 to 60 years of age.

㈏ 생계비 : 소득액의 1/3 (경험칙)

㈐ 계산 : 132,804,745원 (별지 손해배상액 계산표 3 참조)

[Evidence Evidence] No. 35-1 and No. 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

(b) Funeral expenses.

As funeral expenses for the deceased, the Plaintiff spent KRW 9,000,000 per capita in total.

(c) Compensation money;

The accident of this case can be sufficiently recognized in light of the empirical rule that the deceased's death at once and the mother or mother's mother or mother's mother's mother's suffering from considerable mental suffering. Thus, the defendant is obliged to suffer from their mental suffering.

Furthermore, in relation to the amount of consolation money, the plaintiff was killed at the same time by all of his family members due to the accident of this case. The accident of the aircraft that caused the death of the deceased was in need of strict liability different from other traffic accidents to ensure aviation safety. The defendant is a large airline and did not have any economic loss due to the accident of this case. The U.S. court had the U.S. court paid consolation money to the deceased for 90 million won or more per person as consolation money for the deceased due to the accident of the 1983 KAL 07 case. Considering that consolation money of the same level similar as above was paid to the accident of the 1997, the compensation money for the deceased non-party 1 was paid to the deceased non-party 30 million won, the deceased non-party 3,200 million won, the consolation money for the deceased non-party 4, and the consolation money for the plaintiff as 100 million won for the plaintiff, the plaintiff's family relation and the extent of the accident of this case should be considered as above.

- Deceaseds: 80,000,000 won

- Plaintiff: 20,000,000 won

(d) Inheritance relations; and

The Plaintiff, the sole inheritor of the deceased, succeeded solely to the deceased’s damage claim arising from the instant accident.

(e) the amount recognized;

2,063,327,802 won (=the deceased Nonparty 1’s lost income of KRW 1,523,081,591 + The deceased Nonparty 3’s lost income of KRW 138,441,46 + The deceased Nonparty 4’s lost income of KRW 132,804,745 + the deceased’s total amount of consolation money of KRW 240,00,000 + the funeral expenses of KRW 9,00,000 + the plaintiff’s consolation money of KRW 20,00,000)

5. Conclusion

Therefore, with respect to the plaintiff 2,063,327,802 won and the above 1,940,586,366 won cited in the first instance court from April 15, 2002, which is an illegal act, the defendant raised a dispute over the existence and scope of such obligation, 6% per annum under the Commercial Act from April 15, 2002 to October 27, 2006, which is the date when the first instance court rendered a decision, and 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the full payment date, 12,741,436 won which are ordered additional payment at the first instance court, the defendant's claim for damages for delay from April 15, 202 to the above 12,741,436 won, which is 10% per annum of the above judgment, shall be accepted within the limit of 10% per annum of the plaintiff's damages for delay.

【Calculation Table of Damages Amount】

Judge Lee Sung-sung (Presiding Judge)