(a) The scope of compensation for damage (=amount of compensation corresponding to the degree of contribution) and standards for determining the degree of contribution in a case where the ex post facto legacy of the victim due to a traffic accident conflicts between the accident and the king of the victim;

(b) The case holding that the degree of contribution by an accident shall be 50% on the ground that the victim, who had been strekingd of the chest pressure frame, reafed into the part due to a traffic accident, has aggravated and remarkably deteriorated; and

A. If the victim’s after-the-counter legacy caused by a traffic accident conflicts between the accident and the victim’s after-the-counter symptoms, it is reasonable to have the victim bear the equivalent amount of compensation according to the degree recognized to have contributed to the occurrence of the accident as a result of the after-the-counter legacy from the perspective of equitable burden of damages. The court shall reasonably determine the amount of compensation in consideration of all the circumstances, such as the cause and degree of the king, the correlation between the king and the after-the-counter legacy, and the victim’

(b) The case holding that the degree of contribution by an accident shall be 50% on the ground that the victim, who had been strekingd of the chest pressure frame, re-afforested the part due to a traffic accident, has aggravated and substantially deteriorated;

Article 763 (Civil Act Article 393 (Article 393)

A. Supreme Court Decision 87Meu74 delivered on April 27, 1988 (Gong1988,900) (Gong198,900) 91Da31517 delivered on April 28, 1992 (Gong1992, 1702) (Gong1992, 1965)

Plaintiff

Defendant

Gwangju High Court Decision 89Na6913 delivered on November 20, 1992

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

If the subsequent legacy of a victim due to a traffic accident conflicts between the accident and the victim's king, it is reasonable in terms of the equitable burden of damages to bear the equivalent amount of compensation depending on the degree that the accident is deemed to have contributed to the occurrence of the subsequent legacy. In determining the degree of contribution, the court shall make a reasonable determination by taking into account all circumstances, such as the cause and degree of the king, the correlation between the king and the subsequent legacy, the relationship between the victim's age and occupation, and its health condition (see Supreme Court Decision 86Meu112, Apr. 14, 1987; Supreme Court Decision 87Meu74, Apr. 27, 198; 91Da31517, Apr. 28, 1992).

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below acknowledged that the plaintiff was hospitalized for the 10 chest pressure table, etc. of the accident of this case from the time of the accident of this case on December 1, 1986 until August 11, 198, but lost 38 percent of the labor ability as cleaning workers and daily worker for general urban use due to pain and after legacy. Meanwhile, the plaintiff had a 10 chest pressure table which was incurred after work of October 9, 1986, before the accident of this case. However, the court below determined that it was reasonable to view that the above part of the accident of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of deterioration or significant loss caused by damage, and since the above king evidence before the accident of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case had already passed for a long time, the judgment of contribution rate cannot be assessed separately from the part of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of accident of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of accident of accident of 5 percent.

In comparison with records, the above fact-finding and judgment of the court below are justified, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the mistake of facts due to the violation of the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, or the incomplete hearing, and the degree of contribution to the king. The arguments are groundless.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Park Jong-dong (Presiding Justice)