logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2018.04.04 2016가단5284454
보험금
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On October 25, 2013, C entered into a “D” insurance contract (the insurance period: from October 25, 2013 to October 25, 203) with the Defendant as the legal heir of the insured and the beneficiary of death as the legal heir.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant insurance contract”). The collateral of the instant insurance contract is as follows. 30,000,000 brain strokes of 30,000,000 won, death of the insured person’s disease

B. The insurance terms and conditions incorporated into the instant insurance contract stipulate the duty to inform the entire contract as follows.

24. (Obligation to Notify before the contract) The contractor or the insured (person subject to insurance) is aware of the fact that he knows in the subscription form (in the case of a diagnosis contract, I will speak at the time of health examination) that he knows about the matters he asked at the time of subscription (hereinafter referred to as "the obligation to notify before the contract," and the same as "the obligation to notify"

(hereinafter referred to as the "proviso omitted") 26. (Effect of Violation of the Obligation to Notify) The Company may terminate this Agreement, regardless of the occurrence of damages, in the following cases:

1. Where the contractor or the insured (person subject to insurance) intentionally or by gross negligence violates 24. (Duty to Notify before the contract) and the obligation constitutes an important matter, the company may not terminate the contract in any of the following cases, notwithstanding the foregoing 1:

(5) Where an insurance solicitor, etc. has not given an opportunity to notify a policyholder or the insured (person subject to insurance) or where a contractor or the insured (person subject to insurance) obstructs the true notification, the insurance solicitor, etc. has failed to give a true notice or recommended a false notice to the policyholder or the insured (person subject to insurance).

at the time of such act: Provided, That there was no insurance solicitor;

Even if the contractor or the insured (person subject to insurance) is deemed to have failed to notify the truth or has made a false notification, this shall not apply.

arrow