In calculating the amount of damage compensation, the amount of income tax withheld between the victim's lost profit shall not be included.

In calculating the amount of damages, the amount of income tax withheld from the lost profit of the victim is not included.

Article 393 of the Civil Act

Seoul High Court Decision 68Da2178 delivered on February 4, 1969

Plaintiff 1 and five others

Korea Coal Corporation (Attorney Kim Jong-sung, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Seoul High Court Decision 68Na842 delivered on August 29, 1968

The part against the defendant in the original judgment shall be reversed, and that part of the case shall be remanded to Seoul High Court.

The plaintiffs' respective appeals are dismissed.

The costs of the appeal by the plaintiffs are assessed against the plaintiffs.

The plaintiffs' grounds of appeal are examined as follows:

When comprehensively reviewing each evidence cited by the original judgment in accordance with the records, the fact of recognizing the original judgment can be recognized that the occurrence of the instant accident was negligent in failing to avoid as soon as possible in the direction of five parts of the victim's evacuation, under the instruction of the victim's evacuation, and that there was no error of logical rules or rule of experience in the preparation of evidence and the fact-finding in the original judgment. Therefore, the argument is groundless.

Defendant’s attorney’s ground of appeal Nos. 1(a), (c), and (2);

Even after comparing the original judgment with the records, the original judgment is recognized to have been engaged in ornamental labor by the time limit of 55, and the monthly living expenses are recognized to have been 1,500 won in violation of the empirical rule. In addition, the amount of comparative negligence in the original judgment cannot be said to be less than that of the victims in light of the negligence of the victims. Therefore, all arguments are groundless.

The grounds of appeal No. 1 (B) are examined as follows:

The purpose of the damage compensation system is to make the fair burden of actual damage inflicted on the victim. Therefore, in calculating the actual profit, it is sufficient to seek compensation for the actual profit of the victim, and it is interpreted that the amount of income tax collected at source is not included in the amount of income tax collected at source. Therefore, in this case, even though the remainder of income tax collected at the monthly income of the non-party 1 and the non-party 2 is the actual profit, the original judgment did not deduct the income tax amount, and it is reasonable to discuss it as it affected the conclusion of the judgment (see Supreme Court Decision 68Da2178 delivered on February 196).

Therefore, the part of the original judgment against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court, and the plaintiffs' respective appeals are dismissed. The costs of appeal arising from the plaintiffs' appeals are assessed against the plaintiffs and are so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Supreme Court Judge Round (Presiding Judge) Kim Gi-gim and Hongnam Table