[채무부존재확인][공2001.1.1.(121),22]
The purpose of the so-called "special terms and conditions for driving security of another motor vehicle" which provides that the insured shall compensate for losses caused by an accident that occurred while driving a motor vehicle, other than an insured motor vehicle, which is a reason for exclusion from compensation, is stipulated in the "damage caused by an accident that occurs in the course of driving a motor vehicle, such as the motor vehicle maintenance business, parking lot business, oil supply business, detailed car sales business, etc."
Of the so-called "Special Terms and Conditions for Motor Vehicle Operation Security" which provides that an insured person shall compensate for losses caused by accidents that occur while driving another motor vehicle, not an insured motor vehicle, is excluded from compensation. This is due to the risk of accidents in terms of frequency of operation, mode of operation, etc. in the case of operating a motor vehicle entrusted in relation to the business of a motor vehicle manager, compared to other motor vehicles, in the case of operating of the motor vehicle entrusted in relation to the business of the motor vehicle manager, the risk of accidents is more likely to occur in the light of frequency of operation, type of operation, etc. In addition, in order to apply the above provision, the insured person shall be the person entrusted with duties or his assistant, and even if such vehicle handling duties are not the unique duties or main duties of the registered insured, it shall be the case of the entrusted motor vehicle, and the frequency and type of operation of the motor vehicle, which is scheduled in the above special terms and conditions, and it shall not be more than the degree that the insurer is expected to be entrusted.
Article 726-2 of the Commercial Act
Dongbu Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. (Law Firm Vindication, Attorneys Jeon Jae-in et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant
Defendant (Law Firm Seo general, Attorneys Cho Jong-hee et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)
Seoul High Court Decision 99Na64843 delivered on May 25, 2000
The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.
1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, when the plaintiff entered into an personal automobile insurance contract (including items of injury caused by an accident) with the defendant on July 9, 1998, the court below agreed to apply "other motor vehicle driver's security special terms and conditions to compensate as stipulated in common terms and conditions by deeming it an insured motor vehicle's liability for damages caused by a large-scale accident or a substitute accident that occurred while the insured was driving another motor vehicle," "other motor vehicle driver's security terms and conditions" are not "other motor vehicle's special terms and conditions". "Other motor vehicle driver's security terms and conditions" do not constitute a motor vehicle maintenance business, parking lot business, oil supply business, and car sales business of the defendant's non-party 3 accident caused by an accident that occurred during the operation of the above motor vehicle (Article 3 (3) of the above special terms and conditions) with the non-party 3 driver's license without compensation for damages caused by an accident that occurred during the operation of the above motor vehicle by the plaintiff's non-party 1 to the above passenger vehicle driver's license of Gangdong No.
2. Article 3(3) of the Special Terms and Conditions for Motor Vehicle Operation Security (hereinafter “Special Terms and Conditions for Motor Vehicle Operation Security”) excludes “damage caused by an accident caused by an accident in the course of driving a motor vehicle which has been entrusted in the course of operating a motor vehicle, such as a motor vehicle maintenance business, parking lot business, oil supply business, washing business, and motor vehicle sales business, by a registered motor vehicle dealer’s business.” This is because, in the case of operating a motor vehicle entrusted in relation to the business of another registered motor vehicle dealer’s business, the risk of an accident is large compared to the frequency and type of operation of the other motor vehicle, and there is another insurance that
Therefore, in order to apply Article 3 (3) of the above Special Terms and Conditions, the insured shall be the person entrusted with the duties or his assistant, and even if the vehicle handling duties are not the person entrusted with the duties or the main duties of the registered insured, it shall be the case of being entrusted with the duties. Furthermore, since the frequency and type of the vehicle being entrusted with the duties are different from the general cases scheduled in the above Special Terms and Conditions, it shall be required that the risk increases more than what the insurer predicted, and the mere fact that the registered motor vehicle is entrusted with the duties of the motor vehicle handling cannot be said to constitute this.
In light of the records, the fact-finding of the court below is justified and there is no error of law such as violation of the rules of evidence, and as determined by the court below, if the defendant temporarily moved the vehicle of this case to the Sejong Deputy Director, a subsidiary facility of the gas station, at the customer's request while working in an adjacent company to the gas station, and the accident of this case occurs, he moved the vehicle of this case to the future. The damage caused by the accident of this case cannot be deemed to constitute "damage caused by an accident caused by an accident occurring while driving an automobile entrusted for the business of dealing with the motor vehicle" which is not compensated under the above special terms and conditions. Thus, the judgment of the court below is just in its conclusion that the damage caused by the accident of this case does not constitute damage not to compensate under Article 3 (3) of the above special terms and conditions, and it is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the application of the above special terms and conditions.
3. Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.
Justices Son Ji-yol (Presiding Justice)