beta
(영문) 광주지방법원 2019.05.02 2018나58966

구상금

Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer of the National Health Insurance that provides citizens with insurance benefits for the prevention, diagnosis, and rehabilitation of diseases and injury, for childbirth death, and for improvement of health pursuant to the National Health Insurance Act, and the Defendant is an insurer that has concluded a gas accident liability insurance contract under which the Defendant compensates for damage to a third party where an accident occurred in gas facilities constructed by B with liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. On July 25, 2016, a gas leakage and explosion occurred (hereinafter “instant accident”) as a result of an accident in which gas leakage and explosion occurred due to the failure to take a reduction in the gas temperature pressure valve installed by B at the factory cafeteria of Jung-Eup, Inc., Ltd. (hereinafter “instant accident”).

E suffered injuries, such as putting in 2 degree pictures on head, wood, and double arms, etc., due to the instant accident.

C. The Plaintiff paid KRW 10,117,90 in total, 11,33,820, excluding KRW 1,215,920, out of the total amount of the medical care benefit cost incurred from July 25, 2016 to August 29, 2017 for the treatment of the injury suffered by the instant accident, to F Hospital, G Hospital, etc.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence 1 to 4, Eul evidence 1 and 5 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleading

2. Determination as to the cause of action

A. 1) Even if a beneficiary of the National Health Insurance has received medical treatment (medical care benefits) for an injury caused by a third party’s act and agreed on the third party’s medical treatment expenses, the Plaintiff already acquired the right to reimbursement against the third party at the time of treatment. As such, the third party cannot be asserted against the Plaintiff by the above agreement (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2012Da39103, Sept. 13, 2012). According to the above recognition, the instant accident is the duty of care as a liquefied petroleum gas supplier of B.