[보험금][공1994.7.1.(971),1812]
Whether the approval insured falls under the exemption provision from unauthorized Driving when the third party's without a license is approved.
The General Terms and Conditions of Business Motor Vehicle Insurance shall apply only to cases where a licenseless driving took place under the control or management of the policyholder or the insured. Thus, in cases where a licenseless driving took place under the explicit or implied approval of the policyholder or the named insured, it shall not be applicable only to cases where the approval of the so-called consent insured is granted.
Article 105 of the Civil Code, Articles 6 and 7 of the Regulation of Standardized Contracts Act
[Plaintiff-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Domin, Attorneys Park Jong-soo et al., Counsel for plaintiff-appellant)
Attorney Cho Nam-nam, et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant-appellee
[Defendant-Appellant] Korea Automobile Insurance Co., Ltd., Counsel for defendant-appellant
Seoul High Court Decision 93Na29435 delivered on December 31, 1993
The judgment of the court below is reversed.
The case is remanded to Seoul High Court.
The plaintiffs' grounds of appeal are examined.
1. On the first ground for appeal
According to relevant evidence and records, the judgment of the court below that the accident of this case occurred while driving a truck at the time of the original adjudication by Nonparty 1 without a driver's license at the time of the accident is just and acceptable, and there is no ground to hold that the judgment of the court below did not contain any error of law such as the theory of lawsuit.
2. On the second ground for appeal
According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that the accident in this case occurred when Nonparty 1, who did not have a driver's license, was seated in the driver's seat with the approval of the so-called consent Kim Jinat, and operated directly the accelerator and speed system, and is an accident during driving without a driver's license under the circumstances where the insured could control or manage, and therefore, the accident in this case was an accident during driving without a driver's license under the General Terms and Conditions of Business Motor Vehicle Insurance
However, a license exemption clause under the General Terms and Conditions of Business Motor Vehicle General Insurance shall apply only to cases where a licenseless driving was made under the control or management of a policyholder or an insured person. Thus, if a licenseless driving was made under the explicit or implied approval of a policyholder or an insured person, it shall be deemed that it is not applicable only to cases where a licenseless driving was made under the above or the approval of the so-called insured person (see Supreme Court Decision 93Da37991 delivered on January 25, 1994; 91Da36420 delivered on December 21, 1993).
Nevertheless, the court below determined that the provision of exemption from the duty of driving without a license shall apply to the case of the accident of this case on the ground of its decision. Therefore, the court below erred in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the exemption from the duty of driving without a license, and it is clear that such illegality affected the conclusion of the judgment, and therefore, there is a reason to point this out.
3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below for a new trial and determination. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.
Justices Kim Yong-sik (Presiding Justice)