채무부존재확인
1. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant)'s appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant).
purport, purport, and.
A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.
1. The reasoning for this part of the facts of recognition is as stated in Paragraph 1 of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for the dismissal of Claim 1-C and [Ground of recognition] from among the judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, this part of the reasoning is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of
(2) The main part shall be the part
C. On November 11, 2015, the Defendant: (a) was born on the D date; and (b) was inspected by the E Hospital on his/her own reputation image on November 11, 2015; and (c) on January 4, 2016, he/she was found to have been found to have been using serious brain ties in the left-hand side of the Korean Standard Disease Disease Classification (hereinafter
(I63.9) Diagnosis was received.
[Ground of recognition] The absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including the number of branch offices), each appraisal commission to the F Association of the first instance court, the result of the appraisal commission to the I Hospital of this court, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The main point of the Plaintiff’s assertion is that brain disease that occurred to the Defendant is merely a result of the continued cerebral typhism (Classification No. 191.2) or the above cerebral typhism that occurred in the new typology, and is not within the coverage of the insurance contract of this case. Therefore, the Plaintiff is not obliged to pay insurance money to the Defendant.
B. The gist of the defendant's assertion is that the defendant was diagnosed with the serious brain salutism (Classification No. 163.9) of the left-hand side through the self-salutic image (MRI) test, which is the method stipulated in the insurance contract of this case, and this constitutes each insurance accident covered by the brain salute of the insurance contract of this case and the special terms and conditions of guarantee of brain salute of the brain salute of the brain salute of this case, and thus, the plaintiff
3. Determination
A. We examine whether the occurrence of an insured incident occurred, the following facts and circumstances acknowledged by the evidence mentioned above, the fact-finding inquiry, reply, and the entire purport of the argument of the first instance court to the Statistics Korea, i.e., the Statistics Korea.