logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 인천지방법원 2015.04.22 2014가합51202
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The insurance contract mentioned in paragraph 2 of the attached Table is due to the insurance accident described in paragraph 1 of the attached Table.

Reasons

The main lawsuit and counterclaim are also examined.

1. Basic facts

A. The Pakistan Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Painago”) operates the skiing ground in the south of the population of the wife population at the time of permission, in accordance with Article 34-1 of the Southern of the Republic of Korea. The Plaintiff is an insurer who entered into an insurance contract in the attached Table 2 (hereinafter referred to as the “instant insurance contract”) with the Pakistan.

In the general terms and conditions of the above insurance contract, “the Plaintiff is bound to compensate for the following losses sustained by the victim due to an insured event that occurs in the course of performing the business of sports facilities owned, used, or managed by the insured within the coverage period under the insurance policy, and the use of such facilities, which is caused by the insured’s legal liability for damages under the terms and conditions.

B. At around 16:00 on January 1, 2014, the Defendant suffered injuries, such as the tearing of the outer half-yearly spath, the electric spathing spathing of the front spath, and other spathing spathing and closing of the spath from the lower point of the back of the spath line of the instant spath (hereinafter “instant spathm”).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant accident”). 【No dispute exists, Gap’s evidence and evidence Nos. 1 through 4, and Eul’s evidence Nos. 3 and 9, and the purport of the whole testimony and pleading of the witness B.

2. The allegations by the parties and the determination thereof

A. Since the Plaintiff’s assertion so-called “symar” regularly performed the snow survey on the instant so-called “symar”, it cannot be said that there was an ice symar, which could not be adjusted to the extent that it would impede the Plaintiff’s normal symar from enjoying skiings.

The accident of this case is a person with high level of skills, but the defendant would be ski in light of the nature of the movement called skiing.

arrow