The case reversing the judgment of the court below on the ground that the part of the cited amount of the judgment of the court of first instance was revoked in the appellate court in the damages case, and the rate of damages for delay was applied

The case reversing the judgment of the court below on the ground that the part of the cited amount of the judgment of the court of first instance was revoked in the appellate court in the damages case, and the rate of damages for delay was applied.

Article 3 of the Act on Special Cases concerning Promotion of Legal Proceedings

[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Han-sung, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant) and 1 other (Law No. 4485, Nov. 25, 1994; 20065, Nov. 25, 1994)

Plaintiff (Attorney Kim Young-gu, Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant 1 and one other Defendants (Attorney Kim In-bok, Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

Busan High Court Decision 94Na12395 delivered on April 27, 1995

Of the part of the judgment of the court below against the defendants, the part ordering the payment of 57,500,408 won per annum from August 8, 1993 to November 1, 1994, and 250 percent per annum from the next day to the date of full payment shall be reversed.

Of the part against the defendants in the judgment of the court of first instance which falls under the above reversal, the part ordering payment exceeding the amount of 57,500,408 won per annum from August 8, 1993 to April 27, 1995 and the amount of 25 percent per annum from the next day to the date of full payment shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding thereto shall be dismissed.

The defendants' remaining appeals are dismissed.

3/4 of the costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendants, respectively.

We examine the grounds of appeal.

1. As to comparative negligence

In the event that the victim was on board a vehicle in the accident and caused the accident, taking into account various circumstances such as the purpose of operation, the personal relationship between the passenger and the operator, and the situation in which the victim was on board the vehicle, it is considered unreasonable to impose the same responsibility as the general traffic accident on the driver of the vehicle in question in light of the principle of good faith or the principle of equity, the amount of compensation can be reduced. However, as in this case, the victim's non-party 1, as in this case, was the victim's use of the vehicle in the case, as in the construction relation operated by the non-party 2, as in the case of the non-party 2 at the time of the accident, he was on board the house in the above non-party 2 at the time of the accident, and the non-party 2, the deceased non-party 3 driver, the deceased non-party 1, who was the deceased non-party 2, was on board the vehicle in order to return to Korea without compensation, and there is no error of law in the court below's finding the above non-party 2's negligence.

2.With respect to delay damages:

A. The judgment of the court of first instance ordering the Defendants to pay damages at a rate of 127,515,595 won per annum from August 8, 1993 to November 1, 1994, which is the date following the accident of this case, as damages to the Plaintiff. The court of first instance ordered the Defendants to pay damages at a rate of 5% per annum from August 8, 1993 to the date of the judgment of the court of first instance, and damages at a rate of 25% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment. The Defendants among the judgment of the court of first instance ordered the Defendants to pay damages at a rate of 51,180,625 won per annum from the next day to the date of the judgment of the court of first instance to the date of the judgment of first instance. The court below rejected the Defendants’ respective claims for damages at a rate of 108,681,03 won per annum from the next day to the date of the judgment of first instance to the date of first instance.

B. The court below's order payment of the amount of 51,180,625 won which the defendants are not dissatisfied with among the cited amounts of the court below's judgment to pay the amount of 51,180,625 won per annum under the Civil Act from August 8, 1993 to November 1, 1994, which is the date of the decision of the court of first instance, from August 8, 1993 to the date following the accident of this case, and the amount of 50,000 won per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment. Thus, there is no ground for appeal

However, in light of all the circumstances revealed in the pleadings, including the progress of the lawsuit of this case acknowledged by the records, with respect to the plaintiff's above claim amount of KRW 57,50,625, which is not dissatisfied with the defendants, since the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered and the judgment of the court of first instance was rendered until the judgment of the court below, part of the part against the defendants as to the damage compensation of the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked can be seen as appropriate. Thus, the judgment of the court below applying Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the day following the date of the judgment of the court of first instance to the date of the judgment of the court of first instance to the extent that the defendants' part of the part against the defendants as to the damage compensation of the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked. Thus,

C. Therefore, of the lower judgment, the part on damages for delay as to KRW 57,50,408, which is calculated by deducting KRW 51,180,625 from KRW 108,681,03 of the lower judgment’s cited amount from KRW 108,681,03, is reversed, and this part is sufficient for a party member to directly render a judgment, and thus, it is decided to

As recognized by the court below, the defendants are obligated to pay to the plaintiff 108,681,03 won including the total amount of damages and consolation money of 51,180,625 won per annum from August 8, 1993 to November 1, 1994, the date following the accident of this case, which is the date of the judgment of the court of first instance, and 25% per annum from the next day to the date of full payment. However, with respect to 57,50,408 won, there is reasonable ground for dispute at the fact-finding court as to the existence or scope of the payment obligation. Accordingly, the defendants are obligated to pay damages for delay to the plaintiff 57,50,400 won with 55% per annum as prescribed by the Civil Act from August 8, 1993 to April 27, 1995, which is the date of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the plaintiff's damages for delay is dismissed within the scope of 25% per annum.

3. For the above reasons, the defendants' damages for delay against 57,50,408 won in the defendants' appeals are with merit. Thus, the remaining appeals shall be reversed and remanded as above. The costs of appeal shall be assessed against each part of the losing parties. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Jae-soo (Presiding Justice)