보험금
1. The part of the judgment of the court of first instance against the plaintiff equivalent to the amount ordered under paragraph (2) shall be revoked.
2...
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 15, 2011, the Plaintiff established the right to collateral security of KRW 30 million with a maximum debt amount in the Michuhol-gu Incheon Metropolitan City Downe (hereinafter “instant house”) owned by C, and lent KRW 25 million to C.
(hereinafter “instant loan”). (b)
With respect to the instant loan, the basic terms and conditions of credit transaction apply. According to Article 7 (1) 2 of the General Terms and Conditions of Credit Transactions (Provisional Use), where a compulsory auction procedure is initiated with respect to the security offered by a debtor, the debtor shall lose the benefit of the time limit for the loan.
C. Meanwhile, the Plaintiff entered into a guarantee insurance contract with the Defendant to pay on behalf of the Defendant within the limit of KRW 25 million in the event that the Plaintiff and C fail to perform the instant loan obligations. The Plaintiff concluded a guarantee insurance contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).
C On May 29, 2014, upon the request of creditors F, the Incheon District Court G rendered a decision to commence compulsory auction of the instant housing.
On April 16, 2015, the Plaintiff received dividends of KRW 13,820,228 in the distribution procedure implemented according to the compulsory auction by official auction.
E. On February 13, 2018, the Plaintiff received the said dividend and appropriated it for the repayment of the principal of the instant loan, and thereafter, on February 14, 2018, claimed KRW 8,925,335 as insurance money to the Defendant for the remainder of the loan.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 8, 9 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination:
A. According to the above facts finding as to the cause of the claim, the insurance accident as stipulated in the insurance contract of this case occurred due to C’s nonperformance of loan obligations, such as forced decision to commence compulsory sale of the housing of this case, and loss of profits arising from the loan obligations of this case.
Therefore, barring special circumstances, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff insurance proceeds to the plaintiff KRW 8,925,335 and delay damages therefor.
B. The defendant's defense of extinctive prescription