beta
(영문) 청주지방법원 2017.12.08 2016나10613

보험금

Text

1. All appeals by the Defendants are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited the same reasoning as the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the following dismissal or addition, and thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Parts used or added;

A. The 11th 5, 6th 5, and 6th 11th 5 of the first instance judgment "the whole purport of the entries and arguments in Gap evidence 11, evidence 13-6, evidence 20 through 35, 37, 38, 41, 54, 55, and evidence 3 of Eul's 11, evidence 13-6, Gap 20 through 35, 37, 38, 41, 54, 55, 57 through 59, 66 through 68, each entry in Eul evidence 3 of this court, witness E, and T's testimony and arguments."

B. Nonparty 12, 13, and 14 of the first instance judgment, stated “Cheongju District Court 2013 Goju High Court 2013 Goju High Court 1613 and Cheongju District Court 2015No1312.”

C. The defendants' assertion 1) The defendants asserted that even if each of the insurance contracts of this case is valid, since the plaintiff received false or excessive hospitalization, it should be calculated by calculating the number of hospitalization days and operating fees as recognized by the necessity of hospitalization. The defendant Eul corporation, the defendant C corporation, and the defendant D corporation, the amount of KRW 17,80,000,000,000, which was already paid to the plaintiff, should be paid to each of the plaintiff.

(2) Following the determination, as seen earlier, the following circumstances are revealed, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of Gap evidence Nos. 11, 21 through 33, 41, 66, and 68 and the overall purport of the arguments, namely, the doctors who provided the plaintiff, who provided the medical treatment, revealed that the necessity of the plaintiff’s hospitalization was recognized, and that most of the plaintiff were in the hospital at the time of hospitalization, and it is difficult for the plaintiff to completely recover from disease and need continuous medical treatment.