A. On March 10, 1996, the Plaintiff was a stock company that mainly engages in the insurance business, and entered into an insurance contract entered in the [Attachment 1] list with Defendant A (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. D, on March 31, 1996, in the street in front of the 583-5 Guri-dong, Suwon-si, 583-5 Guri-dong, in conflict with Gari-do, which was driven by F, and died on the same day.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). C.

Defendant A is the husband of Defendant D, and Defendant B and C are the children of Defendant D, and they are beneficiaries of the insurance money of KRW 20 million (hereinafter “instant insurance money”) based on the instant insurance contract.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Gap evidence 2-1 through 6, purport of whole pleadings]

2. Determination on the main claim

A. Article 662 of the Commercial Act provides that the right to claim the amount of insurance proceeds shall expire if it is not exercised for two years, and there is no provision on the starting point of the statute of limitations for the right to claim the amount of insurance proceeds. Thus, Article 166(1) of the Civil Act provides that "the statute of limitations shall run from the time when the right to claim the amount of insurance proceeds can be exercised." The right to claim the amount of insurance proceeds is only an abstract right before the occurrence of the insurance accident, but is only an abstract right before the occurrence of the insurance accident, and can exercise the right from the time when the occurrence of the insurance accident becomes definite. Thus, barring any special circumstance,

(See Supreme Court Decisions 97Da5422 Decided May 12, 1998, 2003Da5573, 5580 Decided December 24, 2004, and Supreme Court Decision 2013Da34693 Decided September 26, 2013, etc.). According to the above facts of recognition, the insurance claim based on the insurance contract of this case is subject to the absence of special circumstances.