1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an automobile insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) in attached Table 2 with respect to Nonparty B and C’s car owned by him/her (hereinafter “instant insured vehicle”).

The defendant is the heir of the deceased D while driving the insured vehicle of this case.

B. The network D was living together with B’s words E, and died of the vehicle while driving the instant insured vehicle without a driver’s license around 06:00 on April 21, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 7 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Defendant demanded payment of KRW 50,000,000 of the purchase amount of insurance, while the network D constitutes the consent insured under the terms and conditions of the instant insurance contract’s security for self-physical accidents.

The term "registered insured, relative insured, consent insured, beneficiary insured, beneficiary insured, and driver insured" is the insured, and the consent insured refers to a person who uses or manages insured vehicles with the consent of the registered insured. Here, the consent of the registered insured refers to the permission of the use of the vehicle, and the consent is explicitly or implicitly, but it is necessary to obtain the direct consent from the registered insured, and the person who has received the consent does not constitute the insured.

However, the network D did not obtain the approval of the use of the insured vehicle of this case from B, the registered insured of the insured vehicle of this case.

Even if the consent was obtained, D's driving of the insured vehicle of this case without the driver's license can be deemed as obviously contrary to the intention of the registered insured.