Maximum working age of a person who drives a private taxi after obtaining a private taxi transportation business license.

Presumption based on the empirical rule that the maximum working age of living activities whose main contents are general physical labor or physical labor cannot no longer be maintained, and rather, it would be reasonable to view that the maximum working age of living activities is over 55 years can be operated even over 55 years in light of the empirical rule. Since driving of a private taxi with a license for private taxi transportation business mainly consists of general physical labor, it is against the rules of evidence to recognize that the maximum working age is up to 55 years.

Article 763 of the Civil Act, Article 393 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court en banc Decision 88Meu16867 Decided December 26, 1989 (Gong1990, 356)

[Defendant-Appellant] Defendant 1 et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant-appellee)

Large-Scale Transport Corporation

Daegu High Court Decision 89Na1996 delivered on December 12, 1989

The part of the lower judgment against the Plaintiffs is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Daegu High Court.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below rejected the plaintiffs' assertion that the maximum working age of the non-party 1 who died of the instant accident can be operated when the above deceased ends 60 years of age while driving a private taxi with a personal taxi transport business license, and determined that the above deceased's maximum working age can be operated until the end of 55 years of age.

However, the presumption based on the empirical rule that the maximum working age of living activities, the main contents of which are general physical labor or physical labor, can no longer be maintained, and rather, it would be reasonable to view that the maximum working age of living activities, the maximum working age of which is 55 years is over 55 years, would be in conformity with the empirical rule. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is erroneous in matters of law by violating the rules of evidence in recognizing the maximum working age of the deceased and affecting the conclusion

Therefore, the part of the judgment below against the plaintiffs is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Yoon In-tae (Presiding Justice)