[보험금][공2008상,34]
The case holding that it cannot be deemed as death due to a traffic accident in the event of death due to a sudden anti-fluorculation during driving.
The case holding that the contract of the insurance contract provides that "if the insured dies due to a traffic accident that occurs during the insurance period, the insurance proceeds for the death of the traffic accident shall be paid, and as a kind of the traffic accident, the accident occurred while the insured is on board or on the platform ( inside the opening area) of the transportation agency having opening the opening space as a passenger," and on the other hand, the term "accident" means an accident that occurs due to a minor external factor (Provided, That if a person who has a disease or a physical handicap and has caused a minor external factor or aggravated symptoms, the minor external factor shall not be considered as an accident) and is listed in the disaster classification table, which is listed in the attached Table in the contract, as a contingent external factor under the above contract, the deceased's driving of the car and dies due to a acute light warning certificate, and thus, it does not constitute a "accident that is a "accident" under the above contract.
Article 5 of the Regulation of Standardized Contracts Act, Article 105 of the Civil Act
Plaintiff 1 and four others (Law Firm Hanra, Attorneys Go Ho-hee et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Public Interest and Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (Attorney Park Im-soo, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)
Jeju District Court Decision 2007Na279 Decided August 22, 2007
All appeals are dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiffs.
The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of supplemental appellate briefs not timely filed).
1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below determined that the standardized contract of the insurance contract of this case provides that "if the insured dies due to a traffic accident that occurred during the insurance period, the insurance money for death of the traffic accident shall be paid", and as a kind of traffic accident, "accident that has been inflicted on the insured while on board or on the platform of the transportation agency having opening the opening space as a passenger" and "accident" does not constitute a "accident that has occurred due to a sudden external accident (Provided, That if a person who has a disease or physical damage and has a minor external factor, or whose symptoms have aggravated further, the minor external factor does not constitute a contingency accident) and is listed in the disaster classification table, which is listed in the attached Table of the standardized contract." Thus, the deceased non-party is driving a vehicle and died due to a sudden light disorder, which is caused by the deceased's disease, and thus, it does not constitute an "accident that is an accident" under the above standardized contract.
2. In addition, inasmuch as the terms and conditions of this case provide that "accidents" shall be "accidents that occur due to a minor external factor or the symptoms thereof are worse," it shall not be deemed as "accidents" under the terms and conditions of this case, unless the deceased dies due to a sudden scarcity that is a kind of disease, and there is no error in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the interpretation of a traffic accident under the insurance terms and conditions, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.
3. Therefore, all appeals are dismissed, and the 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 Kim Young-ran (Presiding Justice)