logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울남부지방법원 2014.07.11 2013가합105824
보험에관한 소송
Text

1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 31, 2005, Plaintiff A entered into an insurance contract with the Defendant with the following content.

Insurance Name: the due date for Class B (Standard Body) of the DI insurance without dividends: The insured for life: The plaintiff A, the plaintiff A, and the plaintiff A, and the deceased at the time of death upon maturity/existence.

B. On March 23, 2010, Plaintiff A and the Defendant changed the contractor and the beneficiary at the time of maturity of the said insurance contract, and the beneficiary at the time of hospitalization/injury into Plaintiff B.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant insurance contract”). (c) An insurance contract concluded by amendment.

E obtained the password, security card, and authorized certificate of the instant insurance account from Plaintiff B, and received KRW 6,225,024 of the insurance refund after termination of the instant insurance contract by computer on August 23, 2011.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4, Eul evidence 2 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs asserted that since the insurance contract of this case terminated without the plaintiffs' consent, the contract termination is null and void, and the insurance contract of this case is valid.

In addition, even if Plaintiff B, not E, terminated the instant insurance contract, the instant insurance contract is for another person, so in order to terminate the contract, the Defendant asserts that the termination of the instant insurance contract is null and void on the ground that it did not confirm whether Plaintiff A consented or whether the insurance policy was possessed, even though it did not confirm the consent of Plaintiff A or whether the insurance policy was possessed.

B. In full view of the above facts of recognition, Gap evidence Nos. 4 and Eul evidence Nos. 4, and the purport of the whole pleadings, Eul shall receive the application for termination of the insurance contract of this case in the name of the plaintiff B using the authorized certificate, security card, etc. issued by the plaintiff B, and the defendant shall approve it and cancel the insurance contract of this case.

arrow