I think Mr.NoCredit is right, obviously no amount of money is worth losing your life over. (I'm assuming the person is not terminally ill).
While that is (IMO) obvious, I would also say that loss of life means giving up any future opportunities - and you never know how valuable those opportunities might be. Even more money might be made. But this is rational thought, and the response might not necessarily be a rational one.
I wonder if the victim's response was more of an instinctive response to being attacked rather than rationally balancing the value of life vs money. Remember the "fight or flight" reflex - AFAIK that's not a rational response, more instinctive. I guess he chose "fight" rather than "flight".
Of course giving up your life to save one or more other lives is a completely different thing.
I take lessons regarding rationale from those who are rational.
You are indeed the aforementioned.