구상금
1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff is against the defendant corresponding to the revoked part.
1. As to the appeal by the Defendant and the Intervenor joining the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “ Intervenor”) against the judgment prior to the remanding of the case after the remanding, the Supreme Court dismissed the Intervenor’s appeal regarding the part concerning the co-defendant B of the first instance trial and reversed the judgment prior to the remanding of the case by accepting the appeal by the Defendant and the Intervenor only concerning the part concerning the Defendant and the Intervenor, and remanded to this Court
Therefore, the subject of the judgment of this court is limited to the part against the defendant who was reversed and remanded.
2. The reasoning of the court’s explanation of this case is as follows, except where the court renders a summary of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance during the period from 9th to 16th of the judgment of the first instance as follows. Thus, the court cites this case as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
[1] On August 1, 2011, the Plaintiff, upon entering into the instant insurance contract with the Intervenor on August 1, 2011, renounced the insurer’s subrogation right in accordance with the terms and conditions of the waiver of the insurer’s subrogation right and the special terms and conditions of the waiver of the subrogation right, and received KRW 2.84 billion from the Intervenor the insurance premium of KRW 3.6 billion per annum. Thus, the Plaintiff cannot exercise the right to claim damages on behalf of the Defendant.
2) Determination A) The terms and conditions of insurance shall be interpreted fairly and reasonably in light of the purpose and purpose of the terms and conditions in good faith, and shall be interpreted objectively in light of the interests of the entire insurance organization based on the average customer’s interest, not taking into account the intended purpose or intent of each party to the contract. Even after the aforementioned interpretation, in cases where the meaning of the terms and conditions is not clear, such as where the terms and conditions are objectively and objectively interpreted and their respective interpretations are reasonable, it shall be interpreted favorably to
Supreme Court Decision 2005Da3526 Delivered on October 28, 2005