In the case where the life of a person who is not the person who is unable to recover and is not the same as that of a healthy male;

A person who has caused the complete paralysis of the sub-competence and salutism and caused the salutism of the sub-competant and salutism and caused the salutism, and who cannot remove or walk the salute by saluting the salute with severe flas, loses the ability to work for himself/herself, and at least 10 years is recognized as being reduced.

Article 750 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 66Da1709 delivered on December 27, 1966, and 80Da1578 delivered on June 9, 1981

Plaintiff 1 and two others

Korea

Seoul Central District Court (65Ga4547) of the first instance court

A. Of the original judgment, the part against the Defendant against Plaintiff 2 is modified as follows.

B. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 2 an amount equivalent to 1,099,678 won and the rate of 5% per annum from October 23, 1963 to the full payment system.

C. The plaintiff 2's remaining claims are dismissed.

D. Each appeal by the plaintiff et al. and all appeals by the defendant against the plaintiff 1 and 3 are dismissed.

E. Of the costs of appeal, the total costs between the plaintiff 2 and the defendant are three minutes, and the remainder is borne by the plaintiff, and the costs of appeal between the plaintiff 1 and 3 are borne by the defendant, and the costs of appeal against the plaintiff 1 and 3 are borne by the defendant.

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 2 1,590,113 the amount of 1,00,000 won per annum from October 23, 1963 to the full payment. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 2 the amount of 5% per annum from October 23, 1963 to the above 1,00 won.

The judgment that the lawsuit cost shall be borne by the defendant and the declaration of provisional execution are sought.

In addition to the purport that the part against the plaintiffs in the original judgment should be revoked, the plaintiffs (Appellants and appellees) shall seek the same judgment as that of the purport of the claim and provisional execution, and the defendant (Appellants and appellees) shall revoke the part against the defendant in the original judgment.

The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

The decision that the total costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiffs is sought.

(1) Occurrence of damages liability

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, if the plaintiffs were unable to get off the above 1st century due to the lack of dispute, their mother's 1 to 3th of the above 1st of the 3th of the 1st of the 1st of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 2nd of the 3nd of the 3rd of the 3rd of the 3rd of the 1st of the 1st of the 2nd of the 3rd of the 1st of the 1st of the 3rd of the 3rd of the 1st of the 3rd of the 1st of the 3rd of the 1st of the 3rd of the 1st of the 3rd of the 1st of the 1st of the 3rd of the 1st of the 3rd of the 1st of the 3rd of the 1st of the 1st of the 2nd of the 1st of the 2nd of the 3rd of the 2nd of the 3th of the 3rd.

(2) Scope of damages

(A) In light of the testimony of Non-Party 4 and Non-Party 5 (except for the portion not believed to have been generated later) as stated in the above evidence Nos. 1, 3 (Simplified Life Table), 9 (In fact inquiry) and Eul evidence No. 1, Plaintiff 2 was a healthy male of 23 years and 9 months old at the time of the accident, and the average male male who was 23 years old and 9 months old and 25 months old and 5 years old and was 35.71 years old, and the plaintiff was 20 years old and 5 years old and 5 years old and 5 years old and 5 years old and 5 years old, and the plaintiff was 10 years old and 6 months old and 6 months old and 5 months old and 5 years old and 1960 won old and 6 months old and 5 months old and 6 months old and 5 months old and 5 months old and 5 years old and 5 years old and 6 months old and 5 months old.

Nevertheless, since the Plaintiff claims all of the above import loss as at the time of the accident at the same time, it is clear that the annual interest rate of 5% is 1,321,678 won (the same shall be calculated as claimed, since the Plaintiff claims that there be income from two years after the date of the accident) pursuant to the Hofmanial Calculation Act (the same shall be calculated as at the time of the claim). Since the Plaintiff’s age from October 22, 1963 to 55 is 32.3 months, it is 78,00 won 】 (the amount calculated as at the time of the accident from October 22, 1963 to the age of 55 of that Plaintiff’s age is 78,000 won 】 the amount calculated as at the time of the accident 5% per annum 18.8060-dong Plaintiff’s claim for the two-year short-term

However, in full view of the results of the verification by the party members and the court below and the result of the appraisal by the non-party 2's non-party 1 in the court below, the remaining life cost of the plaintiff 2-1 cannot be the same as that of the plaintiff 2-1,00 won, and at least 10 years is recognized to be reduced. Thus, the healthy life period of the plaintiff 59 years old to live and the remaining life period of the plaintiff 59 years old to 55 years old, the maximum working age of the plaintiff 10 years should be deducted from the above expected income, and the living cost of the city 6,500 won or more per month can be recognized in light of the empirical rule. Accordingly, the living cost of the above six years is the total life cost of the plaintiff 252,00 won, which was deducted from the above profits expected to be paid to the plaintiff 1,069,678 won due to the tort.

(B) The plaintiff 2 and the plaintiff 1 and the plaintiff 3, who are the plaintiff 2's parents, suffered mental pain due to the plaintiff's above injury can be acknowledged in light of the empirical rule, and the consolation money for this reason shall be reasonable for the remaining plaintiffs 2,000 won for each of the plaintiffs 30,000 won when taking into account the situation of the accident in this case, the degree of injury, and all other circumstances shown in the records of this case.

(3) Conclusion

In this case, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff 1,00 won 20,000 won per annum against the plaintiff 1,09,678 won and damages for delay at the rate of 5% per annum from October 23, 1963 to the full payment rate as the next day of this case's tort. Thus, the plaintiffs' claim for this lawsuit is justified within the above scope, and the remainder is accepted and dismissed unfairly. The judgment of the court below against the plaintiff 1, 3 and the defendant's Dong et al. is just, and all appeals against the plaintiff 1, and the defendant's appeal against the plaintiff 2 and the defendant's Dong are dismissed, and the part of the judgment of the court below against the plaintiff 2 and the defendant should be revoked within the above limit. Thus, the defendant's appeal is justified.

Therefore, it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Article 386, 384, 96, 95, 89, 92, and 93 of the Civil Procedure Act.

Judge Sick-soo (Presiding Judge)