보험금
1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.
1. The reasons why the court, which partially accepted the judgment of the court of first instance, stated “basic facts” and “a summary of the plaintiff’s assertion” are as stated in the corresponding part of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following parts after being written, thereby citing the summary thereof under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act
[Article 3] From 3 to 2, the part "The defendant Dong Dong Life Insurance Co., Ltd. totaled KRW 20,000,000 (=insurance money of KRW 10,000,00 under the main contract)" and the part "the defendant Dong Life Insurance Co., Ltd. shall be "10,000,000,000 insurance money under the special agreement for death of a disaster under the main contract)" and the part "the defendant Dong Life Insurance Co., Ltd. Co., Ltd. shall be "one hundred,00,000,000,000 insurance money under the special agreement for death of a disaster" (as the plaintiff was in an appellate trial, the plaintiff did not state that the principal is "insurance money under the main contract" or "insurance money under the special agreement for death of a disaster", but it did not state that it is "insurance money under the special agreement for death of a disaster" in consideration of the reasons
A. The term “emergency accidents” among the “emergency and contingency accidents,” which are the requirements of the relevant legal doctrine, means all the causes of injury or death, which are caused by external factors, not due to physical defects, i.e., physical diseases or physical physical factors, etc. of the insured. The claimant bears the burden of proof regarding the causal relationship between the external nature of such accidents and the consequences of injury or death.
On the other hand, the causal relationship in civil disputes is not a medical natural and scientific causal relationship, but a social and natural causal relationship. Thus, the causal relationship does not necessarily have to be proved clearly in the medical and natural science, and the same applies to determining whether the deceased died due to the “friendly external accident” as in the instant case, but there is a considerable causal relationship between the result of the accident in question and the death.
Supreme Court Decision 201.10