2015dan5064592 Insurance proceeds

1. Kim ①

2. Prostitution B.

[Defendant-Appellee] Defendant 1 and 1 other (Law Firm Song & Lee, Counsel for defendant-appellee)

D Corporation

Law Firm Masung, Attorneys Kim Min-min et al.

August 30, 2016

December 13, 2016

1. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiffs 50,00,000 won with 20% interest per annum from April 2, 2015 to September 30, 2015, and 15% interest per annum from the next day to the day of full payment.

2. The plaintiffs' remaining claims are dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

4. Paragraph 1 can be provisionally executed.

The defendant delivered to each of the plaintiffs KRW 50,000,000 and a copy of the complaint of this case to each of them:

D. The 15% interest rate per annum shall be paid from the day of full payment.

1. Facts of recognition;

가. 보험계약의 체결김▣▣은 2008. 7. 31. 피고와 사이에, 남동생인 망 김○○ ( 1992. 10. 20. 생, 이하 ' 망인 ' 이라 한다 ) 을 주피보험자로 하는 종신 보험계약을 체결했다. 위 보험계약 재해사망 특약 약관에 의하면, 주피보험자가 보험기간 중 재해로 사망한 때에는 1억 원의 보험금을 지급하기로 되어 있다 .

(b) Occurrence of an accident;

On July 17, 2012, the deceased entered the Army on September 16, 2012, and was on duty as a small gun and was on duty in the front bank iopi (GOP). On March 17, 2013: (a) around 43, the deceased died by suffering a total of head from 10 seconds in the front bank located in the Madio-ri, the Madio-ri, the Madio-ri, the Madio-ri, the Madio-ri, and 25 meters in the front bank after the 237th of the front bank.

C. Status of the plaintiffs

The plaintiffs are the only heir as the parent of the deceased.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-4 evidence, Eul 1 evidence (including the whole number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. In light of the parties’ assertion (1) that a total hair was passed through the head part of the deceased’s head, and that there was a tension on both descendants, etc., the cause of the deceased’s death is the cause of the death. Even if the deceased committed suicide, the deceased was cruel from an appointed soldier, and was dead under the condition that the deceased was placed in a cruel act, who was in front of the annual patrol on the day of the death, and was deprived of free will with heavy stress on the iron work. Thus, the deceased’s death constitutes an accident stipulated in the insurance contract of this case, and thus, the Defendant is obligated to pay disaster relief money to the Plaintiffs.

(2) If the Defendant wishes to fall under the cause for the payment of the disaster death benefit under the instant insurance contract, it must be the case where the deceased died of a contingency accident. If the deceased was killed, the death of the deceased cannot be understood as an accident which is an accident which is a contingent external accident, in view of the fact that the deceased’s own K-2 guns did not discover a defense trace, etc. by dispute with the deceased who possessed the firearms. The deceased committed suicide according to his free will in view of the fact that the two balls were emitted under the ch-2 gun, the total area of the two locations was the same as the center under the ch, the adjustment was severed, and there was no other brain damage on the part of the deceased. The deceased’s death cannot be deemed as an accident which is an accident.

B. Whether the person was killed

The plaintiff Kim One, the father of the deceased, filed a civil petition against the military register as suicide according to the deceased's free will, and the reexamination was conducted by the National Defense Investigation Headquarters. According to the results of the reexamination, the deceased, at 13:40 on the day of the death. The deceased shall report 13:40 on the day of the death, and the deceased shall leave 13:3:43, after launching 2 of his own firearms K-2 ch-2 under the front chrokes, died into the two chrokes, and the pressure of each hand, etc. is recognized to have been divided into the two chrokes. The pressure of the deceased is recognized as having committed suicide ( evidence No. 8, Eul No. 2, the purport of the whole arguments, and the purport of the whole arguments). Thus, the plaintiffs' assertion that the cause of death of the deceased is a cause of suicide is without merit.

C. Whether the insurance accident constitutes an insurance accident (1) related legal principles

In the event that an insurance contract which covers the death as an insured event provides for the reason for the exemption of the insurer’s liability, suicide refers to an act of intentionally cutting his/her own life with the awareness of the discontinuance of his/her life and intentionally cutting it for this purpose and causing the result of the death. It does not include cases where the insured has caused the result of the death in a situation where it is impossible to make a free decision due to mental illness, etc.

(5) In light of the above fact-finding (No. 8, No. 2015Da5378, Jun. 23, 2015) the deceased was forced to engage in an accident that was not caused by the insured’s intentional death. (See Supreme Court Decision 2015Da5378, Jun. 23, 2015). (2) According to the purport of evidence No. 5, No. 8, No. 8, and the oral argument, the following facts can be acknowledged: (1) the deceased was forced to engage in an accident that was not caused by his or her own risk of death; (2) the deceased was likely to have been forced to engage in suicide at the first 6th 1st son’s first son’s office; and (3) the deceased was forced to engage in an accident that was not caused by his or her stress on the deceased’s duty at the time of his or her death; and (4) the deceased was exposed to 200 minutes immediately before his or her death.

C. The Defendant asserts that it does not constitute a disaster because the Deceased moved to a mountain site by 'I would report 'I' and 'I' and 'I' to move to a mountain site. In addition, in light of the fact that the Deceased launched one ball cartridges and died after 1 to 2 minutes, it does not constitute a disaster because it was deceased on his own will. ① The Deceased’s moving to a mountain site by 'I' to a work site is moving to a mountain site with a longer work schedule, 'I', and the extreme stress situation, and is naturally moving to a place that is likely to harm without interference, and is deemed to have been a series of acts in the extension of extreme stress condition. ② In addition, the Defendant’s assertion that there was no reason for the above Defendant’s assertion that there was no sufficient time, emotional, and emotional reason to make free decisions in a state where I would have been able to make free decisions after the first launch.

3. Conclusion

The Defendant: (a) to the Plaintiffs, the heir of the Deceased, the insured, KRW 50 million each of the insurance proceeds for death of a disaster corresponding to the Plaintiffs’ inherited portion ( = 100 million =1/2); and (b) to the extent that the statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the former Act on Special Cases Concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings, and the former Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, Etc., from April 2, 2015 to September 30, 2015, for which the Plaintiffs seek as to the delivery of a copy of the complaint of this case

10.1. The obligation to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum under Presidential Decree No. 26553, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the following day to the date of full payment (the Plaintiffs seek payment of damages for delay calculated at the rate of 20% per annum for the period after October 1, 2015, but the amendment of the above Presidential Decree recognizes only the rate of 15% per annum from October 1, 2015, and thus the Plaintiff’s claim for this part is without merit).

Judge Lee Jin-jin