Supreme Court: "Existing Disease and Disability Levels Must Be Calculated First When Determining Labor Loss Rate in Traffic Accidents"

[Asia Economy Reporter Kim Daehyun] The Supreme Court has ruled that when calculating compensation for loss of labor capacity due to a traffic accident victim, the extent of pre-existing disabilities and illnesses must be calculated and reflected first.

On the 31st, the Supreme Court's First Division (Presiding Justice Lee Gitaek) announced that it overturned the appellate court's partial ruling in favor of plaintiff A in a damages claim lawsuit against insurer B and remanded the case to the Seoul Western District Court.

Previously, in 2017, A was permanently physically injured, including paralysis of all limbs, after being hit by a passenger car while jaywalking across a four-lane one-way road, and filed a lawsuit against the driver demanding compensation of approximately 723 million won for loss of labor capacity.

The first trial limited the driver's liability to 70% on the grounds that A was jaywalking. It also ruled that insurer B must pay about 530 million won for A's lost income, medical expenses, and nursing costs. Lost income refers to the income that could have been earned if the accident had not occurred and work had continued.

The second trial ordered B to pay about 370 million won, calculating a lower compensation amount than the first trial. This accepted B's argument that "A had difficulty working from the outset due to acute cerebral hemorrhage in 2016." Accordingly, it was judged that A lost 40% of labor capacity initially and lost an additional 60% due to this accident.

Nevertheless, B appealed the appellate court's decision, arguing that "when calculating the loss rate of labor capacity due to the accident, if there was a pre-existing disability, the degree of labor capacity loss caused by it should be subtracted from the current labor capacity loss rate."

The Supreme Court sided with B and ordered a retrial and reconsideration of the case. The court stated, "According to medical records, A had already lost 100% of labor capacity due to sequelae of cerebral hemorrhage, so the extent of pre-existing labor loss and reduction must be examined and confirmed first, and then the loss rate caused by the accident should be subtracted." It added, "The appellate court erred in the legal principle regarding the method of calculating labor capacity loss rate, failed to conduct necessary examination, and this affected the judgment."

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.