채무부존재확인
1. The insurance contract entered in the separate sheet No. 1 signed between the Plaintiff and the Defendant A is invalid.
2. Defendant B-.
1. Indication of claim;
A. On July 16, 2008, the Plaintiff entered into an insurance contract listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with Defendant A (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”). The said insurance contract was invalidated on September 1, 2014 due to the unpaid insurance premium, and was restored on December 1, 2014.
B. According to the insurance contract of this case, where Defendant B, the insured, was diagnosed with acute fluence during the insurance period, the examination allowances are paid only once for the first diagnosis, and where the Plaintiff was hospitalized in a hospital or a clinic due to a disease that occurred during the insurance period, the amount equivalent to 100% of the patient’s charges and the expenses equivalent to non-payment out of the health care benefit provided by the National Health Insurance Act, which is provided by Defendant B, shall be paid within the limit of 30 million won, as the expenses for hospitalization within the limit of 180 days.
C. Although Defendant B used high blood pressure drugs prior to the restoration of the instant insurance contract, on November 27, 2014, he/she violated the duty of disclosure pursuant to Article 651 of the Commercial Act and Articles 27 and 29 of the General Terms and Conditions of the instant insurance contract by indicating, “The obligation to notify prior to the instant insurance contract,” in the form of “the obligation to notify prior to the contract,” which was submitted, as of November 27, 2014, that “it is true that he/she had received medical acts such as hospitalization, surgery, medical treatment for at least seven consecutive days, and continuous 30 days or longer through a medical examination or examination by a doctor.”
Pursuant to Article 644 of the Commercial Act, the insurance contract of this case is null and void as the insurance accident occurred objectively at the time of entering into an insurance contract, or is terminated as follows.
Therefore, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation against the Defendant A that the instant insurance contract is null and void.
E. On April 1, 2015, the Plaintiff breached its duty of disclosure under Article 655 of the Commercial Act.