Whether the remuneration for the work performed before an accident can be based on the calculation of the amount of damages.

In the event that an accident occurred while the Plaintiff worked as the head of an office of an office of an office of an office of an office of an office of an office of an office of an office of office, he/she temporarily leaves the office of office, and was engaged in an office of office an office of office an office of office an office of office an office of office, and returned to the factory site after the business recovery is in special circumstances, and there is no evidence to deem that the Defendant had anticipated or could have anticipated it at the time of the accident. Thus, the amount of remuneration of the factory

Articles 393(2), 750, and 763 of the Civil Act

Plaintiff 1 and one other

Plaintiff 3 and one other

Honam Transportation Corporation

Seoul District Court's East Branch (80 Gohap1495)

1. Of the part against the defendant against the plaintiff 1 in the original judgment, the part that the defendant ordered the above plaintiff to pay in excess of the amount equivalent to 23,157,437 won and the amount equivalent to 5% per annum from November 25, 1979 to the full payment, shall be revoked, and the above plaintiff's claim corresponding to this part shall be dismissed.

2. The appeal by the plaintiff 1 and the claim extended in the trial, the appeal by the plaintiff 2, the remaining appeal by the defendant 1 and the appeal by the other plaintiffs against the plaintiff 1 are all dismissed.

3. The defendant's motion to return provisional payments is dismissed.

4. The costs of appeal for the first and second instances arising between the plaintiff 1 and the defendant are divided into three parts. The costs of appeal for the plaintiff 2 and the defendant are assessed against the plaintiff 3 and 4 respectively. The costs of appeal for the plaintiff 2 and the defendant are assessed against the defendant. The costs of appeal for the plaintiff 2 and the defendant are assessed against each party.

5. The plaintiffs' winning part in excess of the sentence of provisional execution in the original judgment can be provisionally executed.

(F) The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 1 the amount equivalent to 63,39,94 won, 8,000,000 won, 50,000 won for each of the plaintiff 3, and 4, and the amount equivalent to the annual rate of 5 percent from November 25, 1979 to the full payment.

The judgment that the lawsuit costs should be borne by the defendant and the declaration of provisional execution were sought.

Plaintiff 1 and 2 shall revoke the part against the above plaintiffs in the original judgment.

The defendant requested the plaintiff 1 to pay to the plaintiff 7,400,000 won with an annual amount of 5 percent from November 25, 1979 to the full payment. The defendant shall revoke the part against the defendant in the original judgment.

Based on the judgment that the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed and on the application for the return of provisional payment, the plaintiff, the plaintiff 1, the plaintiff 23,04,000 won, the plaintiff 2, the plaintiff 1, the plaintiff 300,000 won respectively, and the remaining plaintiffs shall pay the amount at the rate of five percent per annum from April 6, 1981 to the full payment.

1. Illegal acts;

In this case, the reason why a member is liable to compensate the Defendant for the damages suffered by the plaintiffs (including the duty to pay the above materials) and there is no negligence on the part of the plaintiff 1 in the occurrence of the accident is the same as that of the original judgment, and therefore, it is accepted by Article 390 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Calculation of damages;

(A) passive damages

According to each description of evidence Nos. 1 (No. 1) and 4-1 and 2 (Simplified Life Mark and Contents) without dispute in its establishment, the above plaintiff was born on April 16, 1950, and it can be recognized that the age of 29 years and 7 months at the time of the accident and that of Dongin's future life period is 44 years in the future. Thus, barring special circumstances, the above plaintiff can be presumed to have continued to engage in general urban labor at least from the time of the accident and to benefit from the operation until the time of the accident. Meanwhile, considering the above description of evidence No. 8-1, 2, Eul No. 3-1, 2 (each construction marking and content), and the physical appraisal result of the above 5-month appraiser, it is clear that the above plaintiff's physical appraisal result is against the average wage of 30 days and 5-day average wage of 1,000 won and 5-day average wage of 30 days in the present case.

According to the above facts, the monthly income amount of the above plaintiff as an urban daily worker from November 24, 1979 to December 18, 1981, 79,500 won (gold 5,300 won x 25 x 60/100) from the date of the present accident until December 18, 1981, which was 55 years from the following day, shall be 86,250 won (gold 5,750 won x 250 x 250 x 60/100). However, the above amount shall be 55 months from the date of the present accident to the age of 316 months x 316 months, so it is evident that the above amount is 5,12% per annum 5,00,000 at the time of the present accident x 307,197,2947.75 x 47,1975 x 197.7.37.7

(2) The plaintiff 1's assertion that the plaintiff 1 had no profit from the accident at the time of the above business, and the plaintiff 1 had no profit from the above business since March 1973, he had no profit from the above business (the trade name omitted) since 1973, he had been working as a factory site and received 300,000 won monthly remuneration from the non-party 1, who had no profit from the above business. The plaintiff 1 had no profit from the above business since he had no profit from the above business since he had no profit from the factory since he had no profit from the above business since 11th of the same year without the permission of the non-party 1, but had no profit from the factory since he had no profit from the accident at the time of the above business (the above plaintiff 1 had no profit from the above business since he had no profit from the factory since he had no profit from the accident since he had no profit from the above business since he had no profit from the accident at the time of the above business (the above plaintiff 1 had no profit from the accident at the time of the above business).

(b) The cost of future treatment

According to the results of the physical appraisal of the above-mentioned expert witness, the above plaintiff needs to periodically extend the 40 years from December 18, 1981 to 73 years from the average life of 73 years from the date of the closing of argument in this case, since the aftermath of Yadok fever caused by the accident in this case remains due to the aftermath of Yadok fever, and there is no objection against the result of the appraisal by the above expert witness of the court below, without reliance on the trust of the results of the appraisal of the above judgment.

As the above Plaintiff claims damages equivalent to the above future medical expenses at the time of the accident, it shall be KRW 2,482,810 as shown in the separate calculation sheet if the present price is calculated in accordance with the door-to-door calculation method that deducts the interim interest of 5% a year as at the time of the accident (for the claim for future medical expenses prior to the date of the closing of argument, there is no evidence to deem that such medical expenses were actually paid, and therefore, the claim for this part is groundless).

(C) Costs of assistive devices

According to the results of the physical appraisal of the part of the part of the trial appraiser, the above plaintiff shall lose the function of the part of the part of the case, and shall wear the assistive device for life, and the part of the assistive device required for the above plaintiff shall be 140,000 won per time, and its life shall be 140,000 won and its life shall be 3 years average. Since the result of the physical appraisal of the above appraiser of the court below, which is contrary to the above recognition, is no contrary to trust, the above plaintiff shall have an assistive device every 14 times until the average life of 73 years after the date of the closing of the argument in this case. Accordingly, the above plaintiff shall have an assistive device every 1,00 won after deducting the middle interest of 5% per annum every three years, and if the present is calculated in accordance with the method of calculating the part of the assistive device, it shall be 1,

Therefore, property damages suffered by the above plaintiff due to the accident in this case are KRW 20,619,737 (20,126,811 +2,482,810 +1,010 +1,010,116) including the amount of the above recognition. However, according to each item of subparagraph 1 through 9 (each item on the payment of insurance money), it can be recognized that the above plaintiff received KRW 962,30,000 in total from the automobile insurance company as damages for the accident in this case. Accordingly, the above deduction would eventually lead to 19,657,437 (20,619,737-962,30).

(D) The plaintiffs' consolation money

The defendant is obligated to pay consolation money in money, considering all the circumstances shown in the arguments of this case, such as the plaintiffs 1' age, family relation, property and educational degree, circumstances of this case, degree of injury of the plaintiff 1, degree of injury and degree of negligence, etc., which are acknowledged by various evidences mentioned above, the amount of consolation money to be paid by the defendant shall be 3,50,000 won to the plaintiff 1, 600,000 won to the plaintiff 2, and 200,000,000 won to the other plaintiffs.

3. Conclusion

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff 1 a sum of 23,157,437 won (property damage + KRW 19,657,437 + KRW 3,500,000) and 600,000 won to the plaintiff 2, each of which is claimed by the plaintiffs, and 5% per annum from November 25, 1979 to the full payment period. Thus, the plaintiffs' claims are justified within the above recognized scope and the remainder of the claims are without merit. Since the plaintiff 1 in the original judgment, which has different conclusions, is unfair, and the defendant's appeal is revoked, and the above part against the plaintiff 1 in the original judgment against the defendant is revoked, and the remainder of the plaintiff 2 and the defendant's appeal are dismissed by applying Article 9 of the Civil Procedure Act to the above plaintiff 9 and the remaining part of the plaintiff 1 in the original judgment against the plaintiff 2. The defendant's appeal and the remaining part of the defendant's appeal are dismissed by applying Article 98 of the Civil Procedure Act to the plaintiff 9.

Judges Kim Jong-Un (Presiding Judge)