[1] Whether the policyholder and the insured can cancel the insurance contract on the ground that the insurer and the insured did not notify the insured of the payment of the insurance premium in another insurance contract (negative)

[2] The validity of the insurance terms and conditions that if a policyholder or the insured fails to notify the change of his/her address, such failure shall be deemed an insurance company's expression of intent (negative)

[1] Where an insurance premium is not paid at the time when an agreement was reached, an insurer may terminate the insurance contract when it gives a peremptory notice to a policyholder within a reasonable period and fails to pay the premium within such period. However, where the policyholder and the insured are different, the insurer shall not terminate the contract unless it gives a peremptory notice to the insured to pay the premium within a reasonable period under Article 650(3) of the Commercial Act

[2] The provisions of the special contract of personal automobile insurance that the policyholder or the insured's address stated in the insurance policy shall be deemed to be the designated place where the insurer's declaration of intention is to be received, unless the policyholder or the insured does not notify the change of address of the policyholder or the insured.

[1] Article 650 (2) and (3) of the Commercial Act / [2] Articles 650 (3) and 663 of the Commercial Act, Article 9 subparagraph 2 of the Regulation of Standardized Contracts Act and Article 12 subparagraph 3 of the Regulation of Standardized Contracts Act

[2] Supreme Court en banc Decision 90Meu23899 Decided December 24, 1991 (Gong1992, 652), Supreme Court Decision 99Da35379 Decided October 10, 200 (Gong200Ha, 2297)

Hyundai Marine Fire Insurance Co., Ltd. (Attorney Yang Dong-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Samsung Fire & Marine Insurance Co., Ltd. (Attorney Jeong-tae, Counsel for defendant-appellant)

Gwangju District Court Decision 2002Na 1945 delivered on August 30, 2002

The appeal is dismissed. The costs of appeal are assessed against the defendant.

Where installment premium has not been paid at the time when the contract was concluded, the insurer may cancel the insurance contract when it gives a peremptory notice to the policyholder fixing a reasonable period and the premium has not been paid within such period. However, when the policyholder and the insured are different from the insured, the contract shall not be terminated unless the insured has given a peremptory notice to pay the premium within a reasonable period pursuant to Article 650(3) of the Commercial Act. Meanwhile, Article 3(3) of the Special Clause on Payment of Insurance Premiums applicable to the insurance contract of this case provides that unless the policyholder or the insured notify the change of address, the designation place where the expression of intention of the policyholder or the insured as stated in the insurance policy is to be received. However, this provision applies only where the insurance company did not know the whereabouts of the policyholder or the insured without negligence (see Supreme Court Decision 9Da35379 delivered on October 10, 200).

In the same purport, the court below held that the insurance contract of this case cannot be terminated solely on the ground that the defendant notified the non-party 1 who is the policyholder to pay the insurance premium, and that the insurance contract is terminated without paying the insurance premium, and that the non-party 2 who is the insured cannot be deemed to have notified the non-party 1 as well. Thus, it is proper that the insurance contract of this case cannot be deemed terminated on the ground that the maximum period for the payment of the insurance premium of this case has expired and the insurance premium has not been paid within

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing defendant.

Justices Zwon (Presiding Justice)