beta
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.11.02 2015가단116948

손해사정보수금

Text

1. The Defendant’s KRW 3,00,000 and the Plaintiff’s annual interest thereon from June 17, 2015 to November 2, 2015, and the following.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On February 13, 2015, the Defendant suffered medical malpractice.

B. On March 25, 2015, the Defendant, at the D Hospital located in Gwanak-gu in Seoul Special Metropolitan City, was hospitalized, consulted with the Plaintiff, who was a certified damage adjuster, and entered into a contract for the entrustment of damage evaluation (hereinafter “instant delegation contract”). Accordingly, the Defendant: (a) delegated the Plaintiff with the duty to verify the occurrence of damages; (b) determine the appropriateness of applying insurance policies and relevant regulations; (c) prepare and submit documents related to each of the above duties; (d) on behalf of the Plaintiff; and (e) delegated the Plaintiff with the statement of its opinion on the insurance company related to each of the above duties; and (e) paid 11% of the amount of damage evaluation as remuneration upon completion

C. On March 27, 2015, the Plaintiff had consulted once more at the Defendant’s domicile. On April 13, 2015, the Defendant issued necessary documents, such as the medical record, certificate of employment, and the result of a field examination, and delivered them to the Plaintiff. Based on the foregoing, the Plaintiff prepared a damage evaluation report on April 14, 2015 and delivered it to the Defendant.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap 1, 2, and 3 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the plaintiff himself completed the damage adjustment service in accordance with the delegation contract of this case, the defendant asserts that he is liable to pay the damage adjustment amount of KRW 27,712,848 (=damage adjustment amount of KRW 251,934,90 x 11%) under the above contract.

As to this, the defendant did not send a damage evaluation statement prepared and delivered by the plaintiff on the ground that his treatment was not completed, etc., and even if the agreement was not reached, the contract of this case was terminated due to the plaintiff's demand that the plaintiff send the damage evaluation statement prepared and delivered by the plaintiff to the hospital, and make a false agreement even after the plaintiff sent it to the hospital, and immediately pay it. The plaintiff is required by the defendant.