logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.06.14 2018가단5030026
보험금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 23, 2014, the Plaintiff entered into an insurance contract with the policyholder and the insured as of July 23, 2014 with respect to the Defendant C, setting the following terms and conditions from July 23, 2014 to July 23, 2039 (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”), and paid the insurance premium to the Defendant.

Medical examination allowances of 1,00 1,000 cl. 3 p.m. high-amount treatment allowances of 4,000 c.m. 3 p. 4,000 c.m. diagnostic allowances of 1,000 general injury injury death 5,00 c.m.

1. Within the last three months, the following medical treatments have been conducted by a doctor through a medical examination or examination, including the operation for the determination of a disease, the operation for the treatment of the cardiopulmonary disease, the medication of a hospitalization (including a king), or the medical examination for the diagnosis, and refers to the case where a medical doctor issues a medical certificate or a medical opinion:

3. There is a possibility that a medical doctor has undergone an additional examination (re-examination) through a medical examination or examination within the last one year, whether he/she completely recovers from the re-treatment experience in the hospital for treatment for disease (the symptoms and cause).

section 20

For example, if "for example," the questions No. 1 to 5 of the above-mentioned items are "for example," the content thereof shall be accurately stated.

B. At the time of entering into the instant insurance contract, the Plaintiff responded to the following questions among the “responsibilities to inform prior to the contract” in the insurance subscription form:

C. Meanwhile, on July 10, 2014, prior to the conclusion of the instant insurance contract, the Plaintiff was notified of the result of the workplace health examination conducted by the Health Promotion Center of D Hospital on July 10, 2014, that “C grade (the need to observe and re-examine the progress)” was conducted at the post-marmark test, and that “PSA (the need to observe and re-examine the progress) was higher than 5.2 at the post-marmark test.”

7. 17. Medical specialists who live in a D Hospital;

arrow