(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.9.5. 선고 2019나17101 판결

1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant in excess of the amount ordered to be paid below is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revocation part

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 177,671,127 won with 5% interest per annum from December 26, 2015 to September 5, 2019, and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

2. The defendant's remaining appeal is dismissed.

3. 25% of the total litigation cost shall be borne by the Plaintiff, and the remainder by the Defendant, respectively.

Purport of claim and appeal

【Claim】

The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 223,374,45 won with 5% interest per annum from December 26, 2015 to the service date of the application for modification of the purport of the claim of this case and the cause of the claim of this case, and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of complete payment.

【Purpose of Appeal】

Of the judgment of the first instance, the part against the Defendant ordering the Plaintiff to pay more than 150,000,000 won against the Defendant shall be revoked, and the Plaintiff’s claim corresponding to the revoked part shall be dismissed.

Reasons

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

The reasoning for this part is that the court's reasoning is the same as the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Scope of liability for damages

The reasoning for this part of this Court is that, except for the following parts, it is identical to the corresponding part of the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

The calculation table of damages in attached Form of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be changed to the attached Form of the judgment.

○ 6 5 to 8 7 cm on the side shall be as follows:

â…………………… : 10% of the abstract disability (permanently)

As to the reflects, etc. caused by the instant accident, the Plaintiff 15%

The defendant asserts that the labor disability loss rate should be recognized, and about 5% of the defendant

The rate of loss of labor ability is deemed adequate. The first instance court’s I Hospital

According to each reply to the physical appraisal commission and inquiry of the chief

The definition of the first physical appraisal commission is set forth in attached Table 21 of the Enforcement Decree of the State Compensation Act.

14. Subject to class 14 "Person who has left the sway of divestains on the surface of a bridge."

5% of the loss rate of labor ability, but the fact-finding by the plaintiff

the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act [Attachment 6] 12.

The rate of loss of labor ability by applying the item of "persons with a high-level chest in the face";

B changed its view at 15%. However, industrial accident compensation insurance has been changed.

The attached Table of the Enforcement Decree of the Act does not state the labor capacity loss rate, and two times;

Although there is a big difference between the believers, there is sufficient ground to change the view.

Therefore, it is difficult to adopt 15% of the reply to fact-finding as it is.

However, in the light of the images of each reply and Gap evidence 10

kneee-free knee-free knee-free (in the assessment criteria of Jagogye-free knee-free

Even if only half of the reflects of disability items are considered, 5% of the total physical area

It seems that the plaintiff will be more than 29 as of the closing date of oral proceedings in the trial of the party.

C. The reflectors or pleschers are somewhat small even after treatment.

Recognizing that the ship is expected to be permanently employed and that its trend is a future employment;

the possibility of type selection, promotion, transfer, etc. to such a degree as to have a significant effect on

In light of this point, the rate of loss of labor ability due to abstract disorder is applied.

It is reasonable to view it as 10%.

B) Ratio of loss of labor capacity

(1) From the date of an accident to August 25, 2016.

For a total of 269 days from the date of the instant accident to March 2, 2017

In case of hospitalization, for eight months, 100% of the labor ability shall be lost.

shall be deemed to have been.

(2) From September 26, 2016 to October 25, 2019, the date of the completion of external stress disorder.

land 45.49%

(3) From October 26, 2019 to December 12, 2019, the date on which the high-ranking disability ends.

26.43%

(4) From December 13, 2019 to the end date of operation 16.3%.

(b) Expenses for medical treatment, etc.: 2,555,979 won;

1) Gender Equality;

23,250,00 won is required for anti-scopic costs, and there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff spent such costs by the date of closing the argument in this case, following the closing of the argument in this case.

The seal shall be deemed to have been disbursed on July 12, 2019 and shall be present.

(ii) mental health department;

By October 25, 2019, KRW 168,590 (=Medical examination fees of KRW 19,630 + Medical examination fees of KRW 28,960 + medicine expenses of KRW 120,00 ( KRW 4,000) + KRW 120,000 ( KRW 4,000), etc.) are required. Since there is no evidence to deem that the Plaintiff spent it by the date of the closing of argument in this case, it is deemed that the Plaintiff spent it four times from July 12, 2019, following the date of the closing of argument in this case, for the convenience of calculation, on the basis

(h) The following shall be suspended:

A person shall be appointed.

(d) Mutual aid:

24,000,000 won, which the Plaintiff was entitled to a mutual aid from the Defendant during the first instance trial.

(e) Consolation money;

34,00,000 won shall be recognized in consideration of all the circumstances shown in the pleadings of the instant case, such as the background of the instant accident, the age and degree of negligence of the Plaintiff, and the degree and degree of the disability of the latter.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 17,671,127 won and damages for delay calculated at the rate of 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act and 15% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from September 5, 2019, which is the date of the judgment of the court of first instance, which is the date of the accident in this case, to the defendant's failure to pay damages to the plaintiff in excess of the above recognized amount from December 26, 2015, which is the date of the accident in this case. Thus, the plaintiff's claim in this case shall be accepted within the extent of the above recognition, and the remaining claims shall be dismissed as without any justifiable reason. The part against the defendant ordering payment in excess of the above recognized amount is unfair, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the cancellation portion shall be dismissed. Since the remaining part of the judgment of the court of first instance is justifiable, the defendant's remaining part in the judgment of the court of first instance is dismissed as it has no reason for appeal.