[1] The validity of an insurance contract after transferring an insured motor vehicle to a third party before obtaining the approval of a substitute motor vehicle where the general terms and conditions of the automobile insurance are subscribed only to

[2] Whether the insurer is liable to compensate for an accident that occurred while transferring an insured motor vehicle and temporarily driving another motor vehicle before obtaining approval of the substitute motor vehicle in case where the "other special terms and conditions for driving security" automatically applies to an accident insurance with no insured motor vehicle (affirmative)

[1] Under Article 726-4 of the Commercial Act, the provisions of the General Agreement on Automobile that does not pay insurance money for an insured automobile after the transfer of an insured automobile shall not be paid unless the insurer succeeds to the obligation under the insurance contract to the transferee as long as the insured transferred an automobile during the insurance period without obtaining the insurer’s consent. As a result, if the insured automobile is subscribed only to the General Agreement on Automobile Insurance, there is no insured automobile until the insured automobile is transferred and obtained the approval, and therefore, there is no insured automobile until the insured automobile is acquired after the transfer of the insured automobile, and therefore, there is no liability for compensation for the insurer because the insured cannot be caused by the occurrence of an insured automobile (referred to as the condition that the insurance contract has been suspended), but the insurance contract is terminated

[2] An insured incident may occur regardless of the insured automobile if the "other special terms and conditions for driving security" are automatically applied to the insured automobile regardless of the insured automobile (in the event that the insured without fault, etc. is injured by the non-life insurance), and since the scope of the insured automobile is expanded as a result of other automobiles under the special terms and conditions as well as other automobiles under the said special terms and conditions are considered to be insured automobile, it cannot be said that there is no insured automobile even before the transfer of the insured automobile and the approval of the substitute automobile is granted, and there are cases where the liability for compensation occurs during that period, it cannot be deemed that the insurance contract is suspended due to the transfer of the insured automobile, and the insurer is liable to compensate for the said accident in accordance with the said special terms and conditions.

[1] Article 726-4 and / [2] Article 726-4 of the Commercial Act, Article 5 (2) of the Regulation of Standardized Contracts Act

Dongbu Fire Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. (Attorneys Gyeong-soo et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

[Defendant-Appellant] Han-ho (Attorney Shin Ho-ho et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Incheon District Court Decision 97Da17574 delivered on October 15, 1997

1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff in both the first and second instances.

On January 20, 1997, around 15:50, at a point 137.5 km, Myeondodon-ri, Myeondon-ri, Myeondon-ri, Dong-dong Highway, which is located at the Myeondon-dong Highway, and (vehicle Number omitted) vehicles, it is confirmed that there is no insurance obligation of the plaintiff against the defendant under an insurance contract stated in the attached Table, with respect to the collision accident with vehicles.

The judgment of the court below is revoked and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

1. Of the reasoning of the judgment of the court, the part citing the factual facts and the provisions of the standardized contract is identical to the entries of the judgment of the court below, thereby citing them as they are in accordance with Article 3

2. The plaintiff's assertion

The plaintiff asserts that since the accident of this case occurred after the time the deceased Kim Jong-le transferred the insured automobile, the plaintiff is not obligated to pay the insurance money in accordance with Article 59 (2) of the General Terms and Conditions.

3. Determination

Article 59(2) of the General Terms and Conditions that no insurance money shall be paid for an insured automobile after the transfer of the insured automobile, provides that Article 726-4 of the Commercial Act provides that the obligation under the insurance contract shall not be succeeded to the assignee unless the insurer obtains the consent of the insurer even if the insured transfers the automobile during the insurance period, and therefore, the insured shall not be paid for an insured automobile which occurred after the transfer of the insured automobile (this is apparent in light of the general provisions of the foregoing provision, and the provisions of the same shall not apply in cases where the insured automobile transfers the obligation under the rights and obligations under the insurance contract to the transferee of the insured automobile and obtains the approval thereof). As a result, if the insured automobile is admitted only to the general terms and conditions of the automobile insurance, there is no insured automobile until the insured automobile is transferred after the acquisition of the substitute automobile, and therefore, there is no liability to compensate for the insurer because there is no occurrence of the insured accident (

In addition, an insured accident may occur regardless of the insured vehicle if another accident is covered automatically by the special terms and conditions of driver's insurance with no insured vehicle (such as where the insured person inflicts an injury by the non-insured vehicle while walking) and other automobiles stipulated in the special terms and conditions are considered to be an insured automobile as a result of the expansion of the scope of the insured vehicle, so it cannot be said that there is no insured automobile even before transferring the insured vehicle and obtaining approval of the substitute vehicle. Therefore, there are cases where liability for compensation occurs during that period (such as accidents caused by the substitute vehicle before obtaining approval). Therefore, the effect of the insurance contract cannot be deemed to be suspended in the above sense.

If the transfer of an insured motor vehicle as the plaintiff's argument is suspended, the effect of the insurance contract is suspended, and if the effect of the insurance contract is suspended, the above special clause cannot be applied to the substitute motor vehicle before obtaining approval, but it is clearly unfair.

Therefore, the problem is the scope of application of the above special terms and conditions, and the scope of other automobiles stipulated in the above special terms and conditions. In this case where no evidence exists to deem that the deceased Kim Jong-le ordinarily used the accident of this case, it is clear that the term pool of other automobiles among the special terms and conditions falls under the category of the "insured under paragraph (1)" and "other automobiles than those owned or used normally by their parents, their spouses or children" (the plaintiff also recognized that the above automobiles fall under other automobiles stipulated in the special terms and conditions, and there is no special reason to regard the case of temporarily driving other automobiles prior to the acquisition of the substitute automobiles as in this case, because the insured automobile was transferred to others, the plaintiff is liable to compensate for the accident of this case, and therefore the plaintiff's assertion is without merit

(Other motor vehicle regulations are applicable to cases where the insured motor vehicle under paragraph (1) is not transferred, and there is no limit to interpret that paragraph (2) shall apply to cases where the insured motor vehicle is transferred. However, the separate provision of Paragraph (2) is that the insured motor vehicle is owned by the insured and does not fall under paragraph (1). It is difficult to view that paragraphs (1) and (2) are divided based on transfer, and even if it is not so, if the meaning of the terms is not clear, it cannot be interpreted in light of the provisions of Article 5 (2) of the Act on the Regulation of Terms and Conditions that the meaning of the terms and conditions should be interpreted favorably to the customer.

In addition, even if such interpretation is interpreted as above, if the insured motor vehicle is not transferred temporarily, the effect of the insurance on the two motor vehicles temporarily, and in any case, if it is transferred, the effect of the insurance is limited to one motor vehicle even if it is changed from time to time without acquiring the substitute motor vehicle, and even if it is operated from time to time, the effect of the insurance is limited to one motor vehicle. Therefore, even if all circumstances asserted by the plaintiff are considered, it does not particularly lead to an unfair outcome. In addition, the issue of whether the existence of the liability of the plaintiff for compensation is at issue or the scope of the liability of the plaintiff is not disputed, but it is very difficult for the victim of the accident of this case to clarify the scope of the liability of the plaintiff in this case as well as the defendant in the case of

4. Conclusion

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court below that issued a different conclusion is unfair, so it is revoked by the defendant's appeal and the plaintiff's claim is dismissed as per Disposition.

Justices Kim Jong-il (Presiding Justice) Kim Jong-chul