[약정보험금청구사건][고집1980민(1),454]
The meaning of "a person who does not have a driver's license as provided in the Acts and subordinate statutes" under the General Insurance Clause
"A person who does not have a driver's license as prescribed by Acts and subordinate statutes" shall include a driver's license under the General Insurance Terms and Conditions.
Article 756 of the Civil Act
Samcheon Trucking Truck Co.
Korea Automobile Insurance Corporation
Busan District Court Msan Branch Court of the first instance (79 Gohap376)
The appeal is dismissed.
Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
The original judgment shall be revoked.
The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 2,800,000 won with 5% interest per annum from May 19, 1979 to the full payment.
The costs of lawsuit shall be assessed against the defendant in both the first and second trials and a declaration of provisional execution.
On March 20, 1979, the plaintiff purchased a comprehensive motor vehicle insurance policy of the defendant and operated a truck of 2.5 tons owned by the non-party 1 of the driver's license during the operation of the truck (vehicle number omitted) from Masan-si to ju on May 18.01:30 of the same year, and he received street trees from the front of the Changwon-gun National Highway as a sub-jun driver's care, died at the site, and scrapped the vehicle due to the replacement of the body, there is no dispute between the parties. On the other hand, Article 11 (12) of the General Insurance Clause between the plaintiff and the defendant is a damage caused by a motor vehicle accident on the part of the plaintiff, and "the damage caused by a person who does not have a driver's license as prescribed by the law or who was driven by the drunk driver" is the fact that the defendant agreed not to compensate for it, and the non-party 1 of the on-site driver's license was not subject to a dispute between the other party's license administration during the accident.
However, on the other hand, if Gap evidence Nos. 1 and non-party 2's testimony without dispute in the establishment of the court below, the former driver's license No. 1 passed through the front of the Gyeong-dong video conference on April 23, 1979 and 12:20, and the former driver's license of Non-party 1 was stopped on the front side of the driver's license, and the non-party 3 (the non-party 6 years old) was playing on the right side of the truck and playing on the upper side side of the road, and he was in conflict with the upper side of the above vehicle and the left side of the above vehicle, so he suffered three attention. Since the police officer in charge of the Chungcheong Police Station's office did not err in the fact and applied Article 11 of the Road Traffic Act to non-party 1 for a period from April 23, 1979 and applied Article 13 of the Road Traffic Act to the above corrective disposition on the 15th day of the accident.
Accordingly, the plaintiff's attorney's 30 days of the license administration that was issued to the deceased non-party 1 after the correction of the 15 days of the license administration, and the 1979 May 18, 1979 of the license administration was terminated, and thus, the non-party 1 cannot be viewed as "the non-party 1 who did not have a driver's license as prescribed by the Acts and subordinate statutes" as "the non-party 1 did not have a driver's license as prescribed by the Acts and subordinate statutes," and even if the non-party 1 was driven without a driver's license as a result of the initial license administration, it cannot be viewed as "the non-party 1 did not have a driver's license as prescribed by the Acts and subordinate statutes" as "the non-party 1 cannot be viewed as "the non-party 1 did not have a driver's license as a lawful driver's license under the above comprehensive insurance terms and conditions at the time of the vehicle accident, as alleged in the first license administration 30 days of the non-party 1."
Therefore, the damages suffered by the plaintiff due to the accident of the non-party 1 shall not be compensated by the plaintiff and the defendant unless the defendant compensates for the plaintiff under the above comprehensive insurance terms and conditions. Thus, the plaintiff's claim for the payment of the agreed insurance money under the above comprehensive insurance terms and conditions shall be dismissed without merit. The judgment below is just and the plaintiff's appeal is dismissed with the same conclusion and it is so decided as per Disposition by applying Articles 95 and 89 of the Civil Procedure Act with respect to the payment of the costs of lawsuit.
Judges Kim Young-young (Presiding Judge)