204 Gaz.5757 Damage

1. AA;

2. BB

3. CCC;

4.D;

5. E;

6. F;

7. GG;

8. H;

9. III

10. JJJ

11.K;

12. L;

13.M;

14.N

15. 000

16. PP;

17. QQQ

18. RR

19.S

20.T;

21. UU.S.

Since the legal representative is a minor, TT, MaS

[Defendant-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 2 others

The Chinese International Aviation Corporation

Law Firm △△, Counsel for defendant-appellant

January 17, 2007

February 14, 2007

1. 피고는 원고 AAA, BBB, CCC에게 각 108,606,861원, 원고 DDD, EEE, FFF, GGG, HHH에게 각 70,109,011원, 원고 III, NNN에게 각 8,917,718원, 원고 JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM, 000, PPP, QQQ, RRR에게 각 6,111,812원, 원고 SSS에게 178,106,817원, 원고 TTT, UUU에게 각 800,000원 및 각 이에 대하여 2002. 4. 15.부터 2007. 2. 14.까지 연 5%, 그 다음날부터 다 갚는 날까지 연 20%의 각 비율에 의한 돈을 지급하라.

2. Each of the plaintiffs' remaining claims is dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by each person;

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

피고는 원고 AAA, BBB, CCC에게 각 900,000,000원, 원고 DDD, EEE, FFF, GGG, HHH에게 각 624,000,000원, 원고 III, NNN에게 각 65,778,329원, 원고 JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM, 000, PPP, QQQ, RRR에 각 43,852,219원, 원고 SSS에게 6,000,000,000원, 원고 TTT, UUU에게 각 1,000,000원 및 각 이에 대하여 2002. 4. 15.부터 이 판결 선고일까지 연 5%, 그 다음날부터 다 갚는 날까지 연 20%의 각 비율에 의한 돈을 지급하라.

1. Occurrence of liability for damages;

(a) Facts of recognition;

The following facts are not disputed between the parties, or are recognized by comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of arguments in the descriptions of Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 1-1 through 4, Gap evidence 2-1 through 6, Gap evidence 3-1 through 8, Gap evidence 2-4, Gap evidence 3-1, 1-2, 1-3, Gap evidence 2-1 through 5, Gap evidence 3-1 through 9, Gap evidence 3-3-4, and Gap evidence 6.

(1) 피고는 대한민국에 영업소를 두고 있는 중화인민공화국의 법인으로서 ▶ 767-200 기종 129편 항공기(이하 '이 사건 항공기'라 한다)의 항공운송인이고, ◎◎◎, @@@, , ●●●, OOO, 원고 SSS는 피고와 출발지를 중화인민공화국의 베이징, 도착지를 대한민국 부산으로 하는 항공운송계약을 체결하고 이 사건 항공기에 탑승한 자들이다.

(2) On April 15, 2002, at around 08:37, the aircraft of this case fell from the Vietnam of China and around April 15, 2002, at around 11:21, the instant accident fell (hereinafter referred to as the “accident of this case”) at the end of 4.6 km located north from the 18R Sile of the runway of the runway while changing the channel of the valley to land on the 18R of the runway of the Republic of Korea and approaching the runway to the runway of the runway of the Republic of Korea.

(3) The circumstances and causes of the instant accident are as follows.

(A) On April 15, 2002, before the vessel access was conducted, flight crew of the instant aircraft did not include matters related to the failure approach (Mssed Approach) among the hybrids contained in the U.S. Operational Procedures and the People’s Republic of China’s Republic of China’s Republic of China, where the situation surrounding the runway cannot be confirmed as the land during the vessel access due to the vessel’s navigation procedures, the failure approach procedure, i.e., the failure approach procedure, if the situation surrounding the runway cannot be confirmed as the land during the vessel access.

(B) Flight crew members failed to properly manage crew resources, and they lost their awareness of the situation during the 18R from the runway of Kimhae Airport at the runway and did not hold three lines at the time when the captain intended to do so, and the aircraft was out of the transit zone due to the delay in the line.

(C) On the other hand, flight crew did not immediately implement the runway, even though they lost the runway at the night during the 18R’s length approach, and recommended that the 1st class pilot of the first class pilot of the instant accident return to the 5th class captain of the instant accident, but the captain did not comply with it, and the 1st class pilot of the first class flight continued to fly without implementing the happiness, and the 5th class pilot of the first class navigator conflicts with the dynamic mountain located outside the zone of access to the vessel.

(4) 이 사건 사고로 인하여 ◎◎◎, @@@, ●●●, □□□는 사망하였고, 원고 SSS는 아래에서 보는 바와 같이 상해를 입었는바, 부부간인 망 000, @@@ 의자녀로는 원고 AAA,BBB,CCC가 있고, 부부간인 망 ◇◇◇, ●●●의 자녀로는 원고 DDD, EEE, FFF, GGG, HHH가 있으며, 망 □□□는 이 사건 사고 당시 배우자나 자녀가 없었고, 부모는 이미 사망하였으며, 자신을 포함한 10명의 형제자매 중 가가가, 나나나, 다다다, 라라라만이 생존해 있었고, 마마마, 바바바, 사사사, 아아아는 이 사건 사고 이전에, 자자자는 이 사건 사고로 각 사망하였는데, 망 사사사, 망 아아아에게는 혼인한 배우자나 자녀가 없었고, 망 마마마에게는 처로 원고 III, 자녀로 원고 JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM이, 망 바바바에게는 남편으로 원고 NNN, 자녀로 원고 000, PPP, QQQ, RRR가, 망 자자자에게는 자녀로 갑갑갑 등이 있었으며, 원고 SSS에게는 남편인 원고 TTT, 아들인 원고 UUU가 있었다.

B. Determination

(1) Applicable legislation

(A) The instant accident occurred within the territory of the Republic of Korea is a claim for damages due to nonperformance or tort under the Aviation Passenger Transport Contract, and the laws of the Republic of Korea apply under Article 32 of the Private International Act.

(B) As a result of the State Council’s ratification on October 11, 1967, the Republic of Korea, which is the place of destination of the air transport contract between the deceased and the defendant, promulgated the Protocol for the Amendment of the Convention on the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air signed at Warsaw on October 12, 1929 (hereinafter referred to as “the Protocol for the Amendment,” hereinafter referred to as “the Warsaw Convention”) under Article 259 of the Treaty, thereby having the same effect as domestic law, and the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic of China, was also a contracting party to the Warsaw immediately without signing the Warsaw Convention.

(C) According to Article 1(2) of the Hague’s schedule, the term “international carriage by air to which the said Protocol applies” means carriage in the territory of two Contracting States, regardless of the existence of the suspension of carriage or transshipment under an agreement between the parties, or in the territory of a single Contracting State, if there is any port of departure or destination in the territory of another Contracting State (the issue of any Contracting State). The term “Contracting State” here refers to both the State which has entered into the Warsaw Convention and the Hague’s emotional sentiments, and the State which has entered into the said Convention as well as the People’s Republic of Korea and the People’s Republic of China. Thus, the term “international carriage by air” in this case where the People’s Republic of China, who entered into the Hague’s emotional, departs from the territory of two Contracting States, and the place of destination is a general legal entity, along with any portion not amended by the Hague Protocol.

(D) However, according to Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention, which was not amended by the Hague's emotional sentiments, Article 17 of the Warsaw Convention, the carrier shall be liable for the damage in the event of the death, injury, or other physical injury of the passenger, if the accident causing the damage occurred on board the aircraft or in the course of the work for getting on and off the aircraft, and according to Article 20(1), the carrier and its employees have taken all necessary measures to prevent the damage. The carrier shall not be exempted from liability unless it proves the fact that the carrier and its employees were unable to take such measures or that it was unable to take such measures.

(2) Sub-committee

Therefore, the defendant is liable to compensate the plaintiffs for damages caused by the accident of this case in this case without any assertion or proof as to the fact that the carrier and its employees were to take all necessary measures to prevent the occurrence of the accident of this case as an employer such as the captain, additional captain, aircraft engineer, etc. of the carrier's accident of this case under the above air transport contract.

2. Scope of damages.

A. Determination as to the plaintiffs' assertion on the method of calculating damages

(1) The argument

The plaintiffs asserted that the accident of this case differs from the nationality of passengers, pilots, aircraft owners, and right holders, and that the accident of this case was operated as a global wife. As seen in paragraphs (a) through (d), the damages amount should be calculated according to existing international practices concerning the follow-up management of aircraft accidents, as seen in the following paragraphs.

(A) All airlines around the world have entered into an insurance or reinsurance contract with the Roloydon in relation to an aircraft accident with the Roloydon, which is an insurance company, with respect to the payment of ex post facto treatment and compensation for damage caused by the reverse aircraft accident. Therefore, the method of compensation for damage by the Rodon insurance company is an international example of compensation for damage caused by the aircraft accident.

(나) ♤♤♤♤ 000편의 사고로 인한 손해를 부보한 로이드 보험회사는 미합중국과 주식회사 ♤♤♤♤이 1997. 8. 6. 미국령 괌 아가냐 국제공항 부근의 니미츠 힐에 추락한 쇼쇼쇼쇼 000편의 탑승객들 내지 그 유족들에게 합의금으로 피해자 1인당 9억 원 내지 114억 원을 지급하는데 동의하였는데, 이 역시 위와 같이 형성된 국제관례에 따른 것이다.

(C) The Defendant, like other airlines, planned to pay damages according to international practices in the event of an aircraft accident. The Defendant concluded an insurance contract with the Chinese People’s Insurance Corporation on the occurrence of the passenger’s life damage and concluded a reinsurance contract with the Rod Insurance Company.

(D) The defendant is the maximum aviation company of the People's Republic of China, and the Chinese People's Insurance Corporation, which concluded an insurance contract for the damage of the passengers of aircraft accidents, is the largest insurance company of China, and the above insurance company is re-insurance company, which is the world largest insurance company, and there is no need to limit the victims' consolation money due to the accident of this case in light of the above Korean Compensation Law, which is fair apportionment of damages in calculating consolation money.

(2) Determination

However, even if the plaintiffs examined various evidences, such as Gap evidence 5-3, 4, 17-30 of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 39 of evidence Nos. 5-1, 2, and 30 of evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 39, and Eul's testimony as evidence corresponding to the circumstances of paragraphs (a) through (d), most air carriers around the world subscribe to insurance or reinsurance for a single insurer of Rodrid in relation to the aircraft accident owned by the world, and accordingly, Rodrid was compensated for damages to the victims according to certain standards, and the courts of other countries have determined the amount of damages by taking this into account. Such circumstance alone does not mean that there is an international practice or custom to the extent that it would be determined by the international community as to the damages amount and calculation method of the aircraft accident, and the plaintiffs' assertion cannot be said to have been based on the method of calculating damages of this case. Therefore, the above plaintiffs' assertion is without merit.

나. 원고 AAA, CCC, BBB(망 ◎◎◎, 망 @@@의 상속인) 망 ◎◎◎, 망 @@@의 사망으로 인하여 이들 원고에게 상속되거나 발생한 손해배상청구권은 다음과 같다.

(1) The net900 damages

(A) Loss from lost income

(2) The fact of recognition and evaluation shall be 9,820,583 won when calculated at the present price at the time of the instant accident (Provided, That the income less than a month and less than a won for the convenience of calculation; hereinafter the same shall apply) in accordance with the Hofman calculation method that deducts intermediary interest at the rate of 5 percent per month with the income lost by the instant accident at the rate of 12 percent per month.

(A) the basic facts

Gender: Males

Date of birth: The age of 00 years and 00 months at the time of an accident that occurred on October 0, 00:

Name of rental: 00.00

B) Actual income status

The network chip chip was retired from elementary school teachers and received the pension of KRW 1,434,770 each month. However, due to the instant accident, the chip chip chip chip chip chip chip chip chip chip chip chip chip chip chip chip

Plaintiff AA, BB, and CCC asserted that the network chip chip had earned income of KRW 20 million per year from the two salary classes after retirement. However, each statement of evidence No. 31-2 and evidence No. 34 to the purport corresponding thereto is hard to believe, and there is no other evidence, the above assertion is without merit. The Plaintiff asserts that the net chip chip income should be increased by 1.61% per year (1.78% per year from 1980 to 2001 - annual average rate of 10.17% per year for the same period) since it is predicted that the net chip income should be calculated on the basis of the calculation of actual income. However, it is difficult to acknowledge the increase in income only when there is a high probability that the victim’s income will increase, on the basis of the statement of evidence No. 38, the above assertion is without merit.

(b) Cost of living: 1/3 of income;

(iii) calculation;

○ Period: from April 15, 2002, from April 15, 2002, to the end of life expectancy for 000 months: 09,820,583 won (x heading x 1,434,770 won to 104.358 x 104.358 x 2/3) (based on recognition) without dispute; evidence A31 1-1 and evidence A37

(B) Positive damages

The fact that Plaintiff AA, CCC, and BB paid funeral expenses of the network KRW 3 million is not a dispute between the parties.

Further, the plaintiff asserts that 500,000 won should be paid at the expense of the deceased's surviving family members due to the accident of this case, the deceased's body recovery, transportation expenses 2.83,000 won should be paid for the deceased's attendance at the above Countermeasure Committee's meeting. However, even if such expenditure cannot be viewed as ordinary damages, and it cannot be viewed as having been aware of or could have known of the occurrence of such damages, unless there is any assertion or proof as to the fact that such loss occurred or could have been known, the above argument is without merit.

(C) Consolation money

The above 1. A. The facts and results of the accident of this case revealed in the facts and records, their age and family relations, and the difference between the victim of the accident of this case including the plaintiff and his bereaved family members about the amount of compensation for damages between the defendant and the victim of the accident of this case and their bereaved family members, which led to the considerable amount of the plaintiff's severe suffering. The defendant suggested that the special consolation money of KRW 100 million should be paid upon the completion of the agreement, in addition to the advance payment of damages to the victims of the accident of this case including the plaintiff, in addition to the amount of compensation for damages, the amount of KRW 50 million should be paid beforehand, and the amount of special consolation money should be paid upon the completion of the agreement between the victims of this case and some of the bereaved family members received it with the consent of them as follows.

Dog Dog Dog: 150 million won

Plaintiff AA, CCC, BB: each of 5 million won

(d) Loss deduction

Of advance payment of damages paid by the Defendant to Plaintiff AA, CCC, and BB, KRW 5 million (Evidence 3-1, 2, and the purport of the entire pleadings)

(2) 망 @@@

(A) Loss from lost imports;

(i) the facts of recognition and evaluation;

(A) the basic facts

○ Gender: Women

Date of birth: The age of 00 years and 00 months at the time of an accident that occurred on October 0, 00:

Name of rental: 00.00

B) Determination on occupation, maximum working age, and actual income status

원고 AAA, BBB, CCC는 망 @@@이 ① 가정주부로서 이 사건 사고가 없었다면 기대여명까지 가사노동으로 인한 소득을 얻을 수 있었고, ② 사망 당시 양봉업으로 연간 1,000만 원의 소득을 얻고 있었으며, ③ 위 망 ◎◎◎의 사망으로 인하여 유족연금을 받을 수 있었는바, 이를 기초로 망 @@@의 일실수입을 계산하여야 한다고 주장한다.

① 주장에 대하여, 망 @@@이 이 사건 사고 당시 00세로서 가사노동을 통한 소득을 얻을 수 있다고 평가할 수 없으므로, 위 주장은 이유 없다.

② 주장에 대하여, 그 주장에 부합하는 취지의 갑34호증의 기재는 이를 믿기 어렵고, 달리 이를 인정할 만한 증거가 없으므로, 위 주장도 이유 없다. ③ 주장에 대하여, 구 공무원연금법(2003. 3. 12. 법률 제6859호로 개정되기 이전의 것) 제3조 제1항, 제56조, 제57조는 공무원 퇴직연금을 지급받을 권리가 있는 자가 사망한 때에는 그에 의하여 부양받고 있던 배우자, 자녀, 손자녀에게 퇴직연금의 100분의 70을 지급하도록 규정하고 있는바, 위 규정의 내용에 비추어, 유족연금은 퇴직연금수급권자 사망시 퇴직연금의 일부를 그 부양가족에게 급부하는 제도로서 별도의 독립된 경제적 이익을 부여하는 것이 아니라고 할 것이므로, 망 의 퇴직연금 상실로 인한 손해배상청구권이 발생되고 원고 AAA, BBB, CCC가 이를 상속한 이상 망 ◎◎◎과 동시에 사망한 망 @@@이 별도로 유족연금을 취득하게 된다거나 이를 상실하였음을 이유로 손해배상청구권을 취득하게 된다고 볼 수 없다고 할 것이어서, 위 주장은 이유 없다.

따라서, 망 @@@은 이 사건 사고로 인한 일실수입손해가 있다고 할 수 없으므로, 이 부분 주장은 받아들일 수 없다.

(B) Positive damages

원고 AAA, CCC, BBB가 망 @@@의 장례비 300만 원을 지출한 사실은 당사자 사이에 다툼이 없다.

In addition, the plaintiff asserts that 500,000 won paid at the expense of the deceased's surviving family members due to the accident of this case, the deceased's body recovery, transportation expenses paid in relation to the above Countermeasure Committee's meeting, etc. However, even if such expenses constitute damages caused by the accident of this case, it cannot be deemed as ordinary damages, and unless there is any assertion or proof that such expenses were aware or could have been aware of the occurrence of damages, it cannot be deemed that the defendant is liable to compensate for such damages. Thus, the above assertion is without merit.

Considering the circumstances referred to in paragraph (1)(c) above, it is reasonable to determine as follows:

망 @@@ : 1억 5,000만 원

○ Plaintiff AA, CCC, BB: each of 5 million won

(d) Loss deduction

In advance of damages paid by the Defendant to Plaintiff AA, CCC, and BB, KRW 5 million (Evidence 4-1, 2, 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings)

(3) Inheritance relationship

(가) 망 ◎ ◎ ◎, 망 @@@의 손해액 합계

○ 망 ◎◎◎ : 194,820,583원(99,820,583원+1억5,000만원-5,500만원) 망 @@@ : 9,500만 원(1억 5,000만 원 - 5,500만 원)

○ Total KRW 289,820,583 ( KRW 194,820,583 + KRW 95 million)

(b) Inheritance ratio;

Plaintiff AA, CCC, and BB succeed to each of 1/3

(c)the amount of inheritance;

Plaintiff AA, CCC, BB: Each 96,606,861 won (289,820,583 won x 1/3) (4) theory

Therefore, the defendant is liable for paying to the plaintiff AA, CCC, and BB each KRW 108,606,861 [each KRW 96,606,861 + Funeral expenses each + KRW 2,00,000 (3,000 x 2x1/3) + each of the above data + KRW 10,000,000 (5,000,000 x 2] and damages for delay.

(c)The right to claim damages that are inherited or incurred to the plaintiff due to the death of the deceased DD, EE, FF, GG, HH (he heir of the seat of the network and the Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do Do na

(i)the net;

(A) Loss from lost income

The net shall be 124,545,058 won when calculated at the present price at the time of the accident in accordance with the Hofmanial Calculation Act that deducts the interim interest at the rate of 5 percent per month from the revenue lost by the accident in this case.

(i) the facts of recognition and evaluation;

(A) the basic facts

Gender: Males

Date of birth: October 0, 000

○ Age at the time of an accident: 00 years of age and 00 years of age;

○ Name of lease: 00.00

B) Actual income status

The net retired from elementary school teachers and received the pension of KRW 1,321,190 each month. However, due to the instant accident, the net lost income equivalent to the above pension amount each month from October 0, 000, which is the end date of life expectancy.

Furthermore, Plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, and HH alleged that the net had earned income of KRW 20 million per annum from the two-wing businesses after retirement. However, each of the evidence No. 31-2 and No. 2-34 to the corresponding purport is difficult to believe, and there is no other evidence, the above assertion is without merit.

As such, the Plaintiff asserts that the net income should be increased by 1.61% each year, in calculating the net income, it shall be calculated on the basis of the increased amount in calculating the net income. However, only where it is highly probable that the victim’s income will increase, the increase in income may be considered in calculating the net income. However, it is difficult to recognize the increase solely with the evidence No. 138, and there is no other evidence to support it. Therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

(b) Cost of living: 1/3 of income;

(iii) calculation;

○ Period: From April 15, 2002, April 15, 2002, to the end of life expectancy, 000 months;

○ Calculation: 124,545,058 won (1,321,190 X heading x heading 141.40 x 2/3 x 3) / 141.40 x 2/3) / 124,545,058

(B) Positive damages

Plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, and HH paid funeral expenses of KRW 3,00,00,000 for a network suit, there is no dispute between the parties.

In addition, the plaintiff asserts that 500,000 won paid at the expense of the deceased's surviving family members due to the accident of this case, 2.5 million won paid for the deceased's body recovery, transportation expenses paid in relation to the above Countermeasure Committee's meetings, etc. However, even if these expenses constitute damages due to the accident of this case, it cannot be deemed as ordinary damages, and unless there is any assertion or proof that such expenses were known or could have been known, it cannot be deemed that the defendant is liable to compensate for such damages. Thus, the above assertion is without merit.

B. taking into account the circumstances referred to in sub-paragraph (1)(c), it is reasonable to determine as follows:

○ Nets: 150 million won

Plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, H: each of 3 million won

(d) Loss deduction

Of advance payment for damages paid by the Defendant to Plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, or HH, KRW 5 million (Evidence 5-1, 2, 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings)

(ii)the net;

(A) Loss from lost income

(i) the facts of recognition and evaluation;

(A) the basic facts

Gender: Women

Date of birth: October 0, 000

○ Age at the time of an accident: 00 years of age and 00 months of age;

○ Name of lease: 00.00

B) Maximum working age and income status

Plaintiff DD, EE, FF,GG, and HH claimed that, as a family principal agent, the deceased Do governor could have earned income from household labor up to the time of the loan in the absence of the instant accident; ② at the time of the death, the Plaintiff DD, EE, F, GG, and HH had earned income from household labor up to the time of the lease; ③ the Plaintiff Do governor could receive the survivors’ pension due to the death of the said network chip; and on this basis, the deceased Do governor claimed that the lost income should be calculated.

① As to the assertion, it cannot be evaluated that Do governor Do governor Do governor Do governor was 00 years of age at the time of the accident in this case and could have earned income through household labor, the above assertion is without merit.

② As to the assertion, it is difficult to believe that the statement of Gap evidence No. 34, which corresponds to the assertion, is groundless, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. (3) As to the assertion, Articles 3(1), 56, and 57 of the former Public Officials Pension Act (amended by Act No. 6859, Mar. 12, 2003) provide that when a person entitled to receive a public official’s retirement pension dies, 70/100 of the retirement pension shall be paid to the spouse, child, and grandchild who were supported by the person. In light of the above provisions, the survivor pension does not provide a separate economic benefit as a system for the payment of part of the retirement pension to his dependent upon the death of the beneficiary of the retirement pension. Thus, the claim for damages arising from the loss of the deceased beneficiary’s retirement pension lawsuit and the plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, H, as long as the inheritance of the beneficiary of the retirement pension died, it cannot be viewed that the above claim is without merit.

Therefore, the reason why the lost Do governor Do governor cannot be deemed to have suffered loss due to the accident in this case, and this part of the argument is not acceptable.

(B) The fact that active damages PlaintiffD, EE, FF,GG, and HH paid KRW 3,00,000 as funeral expenses of the deceased Do Governor Do Governor, is not a dispute between the parties.

In addition, the plaintiff asserts that 500,000 won paid at the expense of the deceased's surviving family members due to the accident of this case, 2.5 million won paid for the deceased's body recovery, transportation expenses paid in relation to the above Countermeasure Committee's meetings, etc. However, even if these expenses constitute damages due to the accident of this case, it cannot be deemed as ordinary damages, and unless there is any assertion or proof that such expenses were known or could have been known, it cannot be deemed that the defendant is liable to compensate for such damages. Thus, the above assertion is without merit.

B. taking into account the circumstances referred to in sub-paragraph (1)(c), it is reasonable to determine as follows:

BBE: 150 million won

Plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, H: each of 3 million won

(d) Loss deduction

Of advance payment for damages paid by the Defendant to Plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, or HH, KRW 5 million (Evidence 6-1, 2, 3, and the purport of the entire pleadings)

(3) Inheritance relationship

(A) The sum of the amount of damage at the time of the opening of the network, the ○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○○ KRW 219,545,058 (124,545,058 + KRW 150,000 + KRW 500,000) and KRW 95 million (150,500-5,000 won)

○ Total KRW 314,545,058 ( KRW 219,545,058 + KRW 95 million)

(b) Inheritance ratio;

Plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, and HH inheritance at each of 1/5

(c)the amount of inheritance;

Plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, H: 62,909,011 won (314,545,058 Won X/5), respectively.

(4) The theory of lawsuit

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the plaintiff DD, EE, FF, GG, and HH KRW 70,109,01 [each inherited portion of KRW 62,909,01 + Funeral expenses of KRW 1,200,000 for funeral expenses of KRW 1,200,000 ( KRW 3,000,000 X 2x 1/5), + KRW 6,00,000 for consolation money ( KRW 3,00,000 x 2] and damages for delay.

라. 원고 III, JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM, NNN, 000, PPP, QQQ, RRR(망 □□□의 상속인 중 일부)

(1) Actual income

(A) Facts of recognition and evaluation;

(i) the basic facts

○ Gender: Women

○ Date of birth: October 0, 000

○ Age at the time of an accident: 00 years of age and 00 months of age;

○ Name of lease: 00.00

2) The actual income status and maximum working age

망 □□□는 사망 당시 주식회사 ▥▥▥▥에 근무하면서 월 150만 원을 지급받았고, 망 □□□의 연령, 경력, 직업의 특성 등에 비추어 그 가동연한은 60세가 되는 0000. 00. 00.까지로 봄이 상당하다.

이들 원고는 망 □□□가 주식회사 ▥▥▥▥에서 가이드로 일하면서 월급 외에 가이드수입으로 연 3,900,000원의 수입을 얻고 있었다고 주장하나, 갑31호증의 3-5만으로는 이를 인정하기에 부족하고, 달리 그 증거가 없다.

이들 원고는 망 □□□의 사용자인 주식회사 ▥▥▥▥이 납부한 건강보험료 및 국민연금보험료를 복리후생급여라는 항목으로 일실수입의 기초가 되는 소득에 포함해서 계산하여야 한다고 주장하나, 설령 주식회사 ⅢⅢM이 망 OOO의 건강보험료와 국민연금보험료의 사용자 부담부분을 납부하여 왔다고 하더라도 위 각 보험료는 국민건강보험공단과 국민연금관리공단에 납부되는 것이지 망 OOO에게 지급되는 것이 아니므로 이를 망 □□□의 일실수입의 기초로 삼을 수는 없다.

In the absence of the instant accident, the Plaintiff argued to the effect that, under Article 8 of the Guarantee of Workers' Retirement Benefits Act, the average wage for not less than 30 days for one year of continuous employment may be paid as retirement allowance, and thus, the Plaintiff suffered a loss equivalent to the lost income of not less than 1.5 million won each year from the date of the instant accident and this should also be included in the income that is the basis of the lost income. However, the retirement allowance cannot be assessed as the income that was obtained by the deceased △ Group at the time of the instant accident, given its nature, since it cannot be considered as the basis of the lost income of the deceased △ Group.

Since it is predicted that the net income increase by 1.61%, the Plaintiff asserts that it should be calculated on the basis of the increased amount in calculating the net income. However, the increase in income can be considered in calculating the net income only when there is a high probability to increase the victim's income. However, it is difficult to recognize the increase only by the evidence No. 138, and there is no other evidence to support it. Thus, the above assertion is without merit.

(c) Cost of living: 1/3 of income;

(b)Calculation;

○ Period: Calculation of 000 months from April 15, 2002, which is the date of an accident, to October 000, which is the maximum working age of 128,317,200 won (1,50,000 won x 2/3 x 128.3172) / [Grounds for recognition] A 31 evidence 3-4, and 2-2 evidence 5

(2) Active damages

원고 III, JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM, NNN, 000, PPP, QQQ, RRR 및 □□□의 다른 상속인들이 망 □□□의 장례비 3,000,000원을 지출한 사실은 당사자 사이에서 다툼이 없다.

Further, the plaintiff asserts that 500,000 won should be paid at the expense of the deceased's surviving family members due to the accident of this case, 1,503,390 won should be paid in relation to the deceased's body recovery, transportation expenses incurred in relation to the above Countermeasure Committee's meetings, etc. However, even if such expenditure cannot be viewed as ordinary damages, and unless there is any assertion or proof as to the fact that such loss was known or could have been known, it shall not be deemed that the defendant is liable for compensation, and therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

B.For the reasons referred to in sub-paragraph (1)(c), it is reasonable to determine as follows:

Magna Doz.: 150 million won

○ 원고 III, JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM, NNN, OOO, PPP, QQQ, RRR : 각 500,000원 (4) 공제

Inasmuch as the insured was paid KRW 65 million, funeral expenses, and KRW 262,410 on October 9, 2003, due to the death of the deceased on the part of the deceased on the part of L/C, G/C, and L/C due to the instant accident, the insured on the part of the deceased on the part of L/C, and the insured on the part of the deceased on the part of the funeral expenses, the insured on the part of the deceased on the part of the deceased on the part of the funeral expenses and the funeral expenses should be deducted from the actual income of the deceased on the part of the deceased on the part of the funeral

(5) Inheritance relations

(A) Total amount of damages 213,317,200 won (actual income of KRW 128,317,200 + 150,000 won + deduction of KRW 65 million)

(b) Inheritance ratio;

원고 백정자, NNN가 각 3/77(1/7 × 3/11)의 비율로 원고 JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM, 000, PPP, QQQ, RRR가 각 2/77(1/7 × 2/11)의 비율로 상속 (다) 상속금액

○ 원고 III, NNN : 각 8,311,059원(213,317,200원 X 3/77) 원고 JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM, O00, PPP, QQQ, RRR : 각 5,540,706원(213,317,200원 × 2/77)

(6) Sub-committee

따라서 피고는 원고 III, NNN에게 각 8,917,718원[상속분 각 8,311,059원 + 장례비 각 106,659원(3,000,000원 - 262,410원) X 3/77} + 위자료 각 500,000원], 원고 JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM, 000, PPP, QQQ, RRR에게 각 6,111,812원[상속분 각 5,540,706원 + 장례비 각 71,106원(3,000,000원 - 262,410원) X 2/77} + 위자료 각 500,000원] 및 이에 대한 지연손해금을 지급할 책임이 있다.

E. Plaintiff SS, TT, U.S.

(1) Plaintiff SS lost income

(A) Facts of recognition and evaluation;

(i) the basic facts

○ Gender: Women

○ Date of birth: October 0, 000

○ Age at the time of an accident: 00 years of age and 00 months of age;

○ Name of lease: 00.00

2) Income and maximum working age

Plaintiff S is a family worker residing in Busan at the time of the instant accident and deemed to have earned an income equivalent to the daily wage of a person engaged in urban daily labor until October 22, 2000, which is the maximum working age of 60 years until October 0, 200. The daily daily wage of a person engaged in urban daily labor from May 2002, 45,031, 50,683, from September 202, 2002, and 56,822 from May 206, 206.

The plaintiff SS asserts that its income is KRW 1,980,887 per month, but it is not sufficient to recognize it only by the evidence No. 36, and there is no other evidence, the above assertion is without merit.

(iii) the duration of hospitalization;

A) Hospitals: From April 15, 2002 to May 20, 2002, to January 29, 2003

B) AA hospital: there is no assertion or proof of the duration of hospitalization.

(iv)the ratio of residual disability and labor disability;

A) Period of hospitalization and recuperation: 100% of the loss of labor capacity (from April 15, 2002, the date of accident until January 29, 2003, the date of final discharge);

B) the period of discharge after discharge

(1) 5th disability assessment by occupation and injury rate by : 15 per cent (in the case of both balone part, permanent part, and physical disability grade No. 12 grade No. 13 of the State Compensation Act), or 16 per cent [one year from the date of physical appraisal), from January 29, 2003 to April 27, 2006 (in the case of physical appraisal, one year from the date of physical appraisal), cbald disability assessment table, two parts, brains II-B-2-a-a of scale items]

(c) Graduate pressure table for 2nd gives rise to 20.3% (applicable to 70% of the items I-A-1-d of spinal damage in the Mabrid disability assessment table) (in the case of negoical and static surgery, permanent disorder, and Mabrid disability assessment table, 18% (from January 29, 2003 to May 18, 2010 (five years from the date of physical assessment), from January 29, 2003 to May 18, 2010) of the Mabrid disability assessment table;

② 복합노동능력상실률(계산 편의상 소수점 네자리 미만은 버림)가 사고일로부터 최종퇴원시점인 2003. 1. 29.까지 : 100%나 퇴원 이후부터 2006. 4. 27.까지 : 0.203 + (1 - 0.203) X 0.18 = 0.3464 0.3464+(1-0.3464)×0.16 = 0.4509 0.4509 + (1 - 0.4509) × 0.15 = 0.5333다. 2006. 4. 28.부터 2010. 5. 18.까지 : 0.203 + (1 - 0.203) × 0.18 = 0.3464 0.3464+(1-0.3464)×0.15 =0.4444라 2010. 5. 19.부터 가동연한인 2023. 3. 2.까지 : 0.203+(1|0.203)×0.15=0.3225

(b)Calculation;

(i) the period;

A) From April 15, 2002 to May 18, 2010, the period of 49 months from January 30, 2003 to April 27, 2006, which is the day following the date of the discharge, from January 30 to January 29, 2003).

D) From May 19, 2010 to March 2, 2023, the maximum working age is 153 months.

(ii) the suspender;

A) 45,031won X 22 X 8.8173 x 100 x 100 x 50,683 x X 22 X (43.6739-8.8173) = 20,727,245 x 56,822 x 22 days X (81.328-43.6739 d) x 0.444 x 20,915,369 d) 56,82 x 22 days x 173,345 c) x 22 days x 3256,173,345 c) x

86,551,099 won

[Ground of recognition] The result of each physical examination commissioned on March 4, 2005, May 4, 2005, May 6, 2005, May 6, 2005, and May 27, 2005

(2) Loss, such as expenditure of membership expenses of the Family Countermeasure Committee

The plaintiff S claimed that 500,000 won paid at the expense of the deceased's surviving family council members consisting of the deceased's surviving family members due to the accident of this case, the deceased's body recovery, and the transportation expenses of 5,00,000 won disbursed in relation to the above Countermeasure Committee's meetings, etc. However, even if these expenses constitute damages due to the accident of this case, it cannot be viewed as ordinary damages, and unless there is any assertion or proof that such expenses were known or could have known, it shall not be held liable for compensation to the defendant. Thus, the above assertion is without merit.

(c) Wrons treatment expenses

The instant accident occurred in 83,013,150 won (No. 31 No. 4-1 through 4) for medical expenses paid by the Plaintiff SS due to the instant accident

(4) The cost of future treatment

(A) The treatment is required for the so-called malutical coordinate, the right side (212) and the treatment cost is KRW 700,000,00 and the number of the recovereds is eight years, and this is calculated at the present price as follows.

1) Medical expenses as of the closing date of pleadings (the base date for calculating the treatment date and the life expectancy of recovered goods for the convenience of calculation shall be based on the date of closing the pleadings) X [1/(1+05 x 57/12)] = 565,656 won, as there is no evidence that the Plaintiff SS was receiving medical treatment by the date of closing the pleadings in this case.

2) 70,00 won X [1/ [1/0.05 x 8+57/12] of treatment costs after eight years from the date of the closing of argument = 427,480 won

(iii) 700,000 won-X [1/1+0.05 】 16+57/12)] 16 years after the date of the closing of argument = 343,558 won

4) 700,00 won for treatment costs after 24 years from the date of the closing of argument x [1/1 +0.05 x 24+57/12] = 287,179 won

5) 700,00 won for treatment costs after 32 years from the date of the closing of argument x [1/1 +0.05 x 32+57/12] = 246,696 won

6) Total amount: 1,870,569 won;

(B) The treatment was conducted for the check on the left-hand side and the net side of No. 1 (134). The treatment expenses are 880,000 won, and the number of the water of Bobstegys is 10 years, so it is calculated as follows (According to the result of the physical examination commission of ○○ Hospital on April 1, 2005, it can be recognized that the Plaintiff SS received the above treatment prior to the date of the closing of the argument in this case. Thus, the date of the accident in this case shall be the initial date of calculating the number of the water for the convenience of calculation).

1) Medical expenses of 880,000,000 Won [1/(1+0.05 x 10)] = 586,666 won in the date of the accident

2) Medical expenses of 880,000,000 Won [1/(1+0.05 x 20)] for treatment after 20 years from the date of the accident = 440,000 won

3) Medical expenses of 880,000 won for treatment after 30 years from the date of the accident ¡¿ [1/ (1+0.05 x 30)] = 352,00 won

4) Medical expenses of 880,000 won after the date of the accident 】 [1/ (1+0.05 x 40)] = 293,33 won

5) Aggregate: 1,671,99 won;

(C) The Plaintiff SS asserts that the Plaintiff’s claim for payment of a total of KRW 1,958,320 as future treatment costs on the ground that the Plaintiff’s medical examination and treatment is necessary once a week from February 28, 2005, but there is no evidence that the Plaintiff’s claim was received with the mental diagnosis and treatment of the above contents from February 28, 2005 to the date of closing argument of this case, and therefore, the above assertion is without merit.

[Grounds for recognition] The result of the physical examination commission made on April 1, 2005 to the hospital

(5) Nursing expenses

The plaintiff SS asserts to the purport that it is necessary to open one adult female at four weeks from May 19, 2005 to four weeks, and thus, it is necessary to seek compensation for damages. However, the plaintiff SS does not have any evidence to support that the plaintiff's assertion was sought by the date of the closing of the argument in this case. Thus, the above argument is without merit.

(6) Consolation money

The following is reasonable in consideration of the various circumstances revealed in the proceedings of the case, such as the progress of the treatment of the Plaintiff SS and the degree of the disability after the hearing of the case.

○ Plaintiff SS: 25 million won

Plaintiff TT, UU: each of 800,000 won

(7) Loss deduction

In advance of compensation for damages paid by the Defendant to the Plaintiff SS KRW 20 million (No. 7 No. 1 to 4 of the evidence No. 7) (8)

Therefore, the defendant is responsible for paying to the plaintiff SS 178,106,817 won [1,870,551,099 won for lost income + 83,013,150 won for treatment expenses + 3,542,568 won for future treatment expenses (1,870,569 won + 1,671,99 won + 25,000,000 won for consolation - deduction 20,000,000 won] to the plaintiff TT and UU], the plaintiff TU, and UU.

3. Conclusion

그렇다면, 피고는 원고 AAA, BBB, CCC에게 각 108,606,861원, 원고 DDD, EEE, FFF, GGG, HHH에게 각 70,109,011원, 원고 III, NNN에게 각 8,917,718원, 원고 JJJ, KKK, LLL, MMM, 000, PPP, QQQ, RRR에게 각 6,111,812원, 원고 SSS에게 178,106,817원, 원고 TTT, UUU에게 각 800,000원 및 각 이에 대하여 2002. 4. 15.부터 이 판결 선고일인 2007. 2. 14.까지 민법 소정의 연 5%, 그 다음날부터 다 갚는 날까지 소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 소정의 연 20%의 각 비율에 의한 지연손해금을 지급할 의무가 있으므로, 원고들의 이 사건 청구는 위 인정범위 내에서 이유 있어 이를 각 인용하고, 나머지 청구는 이유 없어 이를 각 기각하기로 하여 주문과 같이 판결한다.

The presiding judge, the Park Jae-soo

Judges Yoon Young-young

Judge Yang Sung-nam