Where there is objective data which can clearly predict the increase of earnings, the standard amount for calculating lost earnings;

In cases of calculating the lost profit of a victim who has lost labor ability due to a tort, in principle, it shall be based on the profit at the time of the accident (time of the loss of labor ability). However, when there are objective data which can be predicted clearly to a considerable extent that the increase in the lost profit would be made, the profit to be increased in the future shall also be considered. The loss equivalent to the lost profit calculated based on the profit to be increased in the future corresponds to the ordinary loss that is ordinarily recognized by the tort.

Civil Act Article 763 (Article 393)

Supreme Court Decision 91Da10381 delivered on May 28, 1991 (Gong1991, 1768) 92Da34582 delivered on October 27, 1992 (Gong1992, 3296) 92Da14526 delivered on November 13, 1992 (Gong193Sang, 101)

[Judgment of the court below]

Korea Shipping Corporation

Seoul High Court Decision 92Na49067 delivered on September 7, 1993

The part of the lower judgment against the Plaintiff regarding passive damages is reversed, and that part of the case is 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 by the Plaintiff’s attorney.

1. On the first ground for appeal

Upon examining the evidence relations established by the court below in accordance with the records, the court below's fact-finding and judgment are justified, and there is no error of law by misunderstanding the facts against the rules of evidence, such as the theory of lawsuit, and if the facts are as determined by the court below, there is no error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to offsetting negligence, thereby making excessive consideration of the victim's negligence in the judgment below. The judgment of a party member who is subject to the lawsuit is related to other cases, and thus it is not appropriate to invoke this case. There is no reason to

2. On the second ground for appeal

In calculating the lost profit damage suffered by the Plaintiff due to the instant traffic accident, the lower court calculated the Plaintiff’s lost profit from September 191 to 65, based on the monthly average income of KRW 1,636,90 for year 191 as a full-time lecturer at ○○ University, △△△ University, 1991.

However, in cases of calculating the lost profit of a victim who lost his/her ability to work due to a traffic accident, in principle, it shall be based on the profit at the time of the accident (the time of the loss of work ability). However, in cases where there are objective data which can be predicted sufficiently enough to increase the lost profit in the future, the profit to be increased in the future shall also be taken into account. As such, the loss of the lost profit party calculated based on the profit to be increased in the future corresponds to ordinary damages recognized as ordinarily in light of the social concept (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 8Da6761, Dec. 26, 1989; 90Da1690, Feb. 8, 191; 91Da10381, May 28, 1991; 91Da2694, Aug. 9, 191; 190, 200).

Thus, the court below calculated the plaintiff's lost profit based on the above increased income in calculating the lost profit loss after 192. However, the court below calculated the plaintiff's lost profit based on the monthly average income in the year 1991, which was the first half of the year 191 from September 191 to the age 65 of the plaintiff's retirement age. Thus, there is an error of law by misunderstanding the legal principles as to the calculation of lost profit among the part against the plaintiff's loss, and as such, it is obvious that such an error affected the judgment.

Therefore, the part of the judgment of the court below against the plaintiff is reversed, and this part of the case is remanded to the court below. The appeal against the remaining part is without merit, and this part of the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal against the dismissed appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating

Justices Kim Yong-sik (Presiding Justice)