2014Da228150 Insurance proceeds

person

A

Hyundai Maritime Fire Insurance Corporation

Daejeon District Court Decision 2013Na103931 Decided September 25, 2014

December 10, 2015

The part of the judgment below against the defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Daejeon District Court Panel Division.

The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. On the grounds of appeal by the defendant, citing the reasons of the judgment of the court of first instance, the court below acknowledged that the plaintiff was in a state of being in a state of being unable to properly move into the left and right after the fact that the plaintiff was in the state of being in the state of being in the state of being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being being in the state of being being being in the state of being being in the state of being being being in the state of being being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being being in the state of being in the state of being in the state of being in the state of being in the verteeb (vert) or the body.

However, the above determination by the court below is difficult to accept as follows.

According to the records, in the case of the disability classification table of the insurance contract of this case (as for the disability of spine, etc.), the body of spine (verte, etc.), the body of spine (verte, etc.), the body of spine (verte, etc.), the body of spine (verte, etc.), and the body of spine (verte, etc.), the body of spine (cl.e., spine) disability (c., the body of spine), and the degree of the disability escape (c.e., the body of spine) shall be divided according to the degree of the disability, and the payment rate thereof shall be determined. (b) The standard of determining the degree of each disability is specifically explained and heated, and in the case of the diagnosis of the degree of each disability in spine (c.e., the body of spine) in paragraph (6) of the

However, according to the records and the reasoning of the first instance court cited by the court below, since the plaintiff was diagnosed by the escape certificate of a light signboard due to the accident in this case and implemented the crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary crypary

Nevertheless, the court below recognized 40% of the payment rate on the premise that the Plaintiff’s disability caused by the accident in this case falls under “the severe vertebral damage in spine under the Disability Classification Table.” In so doing, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the interpretation of the insurance terms and conditions, failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, thereby affecting the conclusion of the judgment.

2. As to the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal, the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal is reversed on the premise that the Plaintiff’s disability caused by the instant accident falls under “a severe playnasium (vertebral) in spine under the Disability Classification Table.” However, as seen above, the Plaintiff’s ground of appeal on a different premise cannot be accepted without further determination, inasmuch as the lower court reversed the judgment on the ground that the Plaintiff’s disability caused by the instant accident cannot be seen as falling under “a serious playnasium (vertebral) in spinnasium under the Disability Classification Table.”

3. Conclusion

Therefore, without further proceeding to decide on the remaining grounds of appeal by the Defendant, the part against the Defendant is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. The Plaintiff’s appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

The presiding judge shall keep the record of the Justice

Justices Kim Yong-deok

Chief Justice Park Jong-young

Justices Kim Jae-han