logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.02.13 2014가합55785
보험금
Text

1. With respect to the details of the accident in attached Form 1, the plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) under the insurance contract in attached Form 2.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The network D (hereinafter “the network”) entered into an insurance contract (hereinafter “each of the instant insurance contracts”) with the Plaintiff as described in attached Table 2 as the content of the insurance contract.

B. On February 4, 2014, at around 21:40, at the restaurant operated by East E, the Deceased died after shocking the vehicle from the road located in front of the restaurant to return home (hereinafter “instant accident”). The deceased’s heir is Defendant A, Defendant B, and C, the husband, who is the husband of the deceased.

C. At the time of the conclusion of each of the instant insurance contracts, the Deceased notified the Plaintiff of his occupation as “office worker company crew (class 1)” but from the end of 2012 to the time of the occurrence of the instant accident, the Deceased was working at the said restaurant as “class 2 of vocational supply under the insurance contract terms and conditions” (class 2 of vocational supply).

[Attachment 5] The insured value of the Plaintiff’s insurance contract (securities No. 1) 50, 200, 200,000 20,000,000 Other death (F) and 14,000,000,000 14,000,000 20,000 and 5,000,000 5,000,000 30, 40,00034, 00340, 000, 10,000 and 40,00,00,000 and 10,00,00,00 and 40,00,00,00 non-driving, 10,000,000,000,000,000,000 non-driving, 30,000,000,03636,304,04,043636,04,

D. On May 2, 2014, the Plaintiff did not notify the Defendants of the change in the occupation of the deceased, and on the ground that “the Plaintiff did not notify the Plaintiff of the change in the occupation of the deceased,” the following table according to Article 652 of the Commercial Act and the insurance terms and conditions.

arrow