1. On October 22, 2008, an insurance contract entered in the attached Form No. 1 with regard to fire accidents that occurred in a building located in the Daejeon-gu Daejeon-gu building.

On October 22, 2008, at around 07:52, from Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, Daejeon-gu, B (C) a fire that caused the occurrence of an unclaimed accident, and all of the inside facilities of the above building and the inside facilities (hereinafter referred to as "the fire accident of this case") is not in dispute between the parties or may be recognized by the statement in Gap evidence 1.

However, if the right to claim is not exercised for two years, the extinctive prescription is completed (Article 662 of the former Commercial Act (amended by Act No. 12397, Mar. 11, 2014). Since the right to claim insurance can be exercised from the time when the occurrence of the insurance accident becomes specific and conclusive, barring any special circumstance, the extinctive prescription is commenced from the time when the insurance accident occurred under Article 166(1) of the Civil Act (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 99Da66878, Mar. 23, 200), and in this case, the fact that the instant fire accident occurred on Oct. 22, 2008 is seen as seen earlier, so it shall be deemed that the insurance accident stipulated in the instant insurance contract has occurred, and since the defendant did not claim insurance money based on the instant insurance contract to the Plaintiff after the lapse of two years thereafter, barring special circumstance, the defendant's right to claim insurance under the instant insurance contract has expired.

In this regard, the defendant claimed insurance money to the plaintiff after the occurrence of the fire accident of this case, but the plaintiff refused to pay the insurance money on the ground that the provisional attachment, seizure and assignment order became an insurance claim, and the provisional attachment would pay the insurance money to be cancelled. This asserts to the effect that the above extinctive prescription has been suspended because the plaintiff approved the insurance claim

Before the completion of the above extinctive prescription, the Defendant claimed insurance money against the Plaintiff.

The plaintiff would pay the insurance money to the defendant for provisional attachment.