logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원여주지원 2015.05.20 2014가단5137
채무부존재확인
Text

1. As to the traffic accident listed in the attached Form 1, the plaintiff is against the defendant based on the insurance contract listed in the attached Form 2.

Reasons

1. The following facts may be found either in dispute between the parties or in view of Gap evidence 1-1-4, Gap evidence 2-1-2, Gap evidence 3-1-6, Gap evidence 5, Gap evidence 6-1-2, and Eul evidence 6-2, and the whole purport of the pleadings as a whole.

On March 30, 2006, the Defendant concluded a consortium agreement with the Plaintiff (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. The insurance of this case is included in the contents of the driver insurance contract in the case of disease less injury and the goods secured by the driver insurance. According to the insurance clause of this case, if a third party dies due to a motor vehicle accident which occurred rapidly and rapidly while driving a private car during the insurance period, the amount paid by the insured as a criminal agreement shall be paid to the insured as a traffic accident settlement subsidy. However, in the case of private use, the insured shall not be guaranteed any accident that occurred while driving a motor vehicle for its business purpose. If the insured changes his occupation or duty after entering into a contract, the contractor or the insured shall inform the company without delay and obtain confirmation from the insurance policy, and the company shall return the difference insurance premium if the risk has decreased, and may request the increase or terminate the contract within one month from the date of receipt of notice.

C. At the time of entering into the instant insurance contract, the Defendant subscribed to a business driver at the time of entering into the instant insurance contract, but was notified of the occupational endorsement through the relevant insurance solicitor while changing the occupation to a business driver after closing his/her business around 209.

[Business (Operation of Private Vehicles) Class 2] D.

On November 19, 2013, the defendant had been driving a business vehicle (cargo) at the distance of Egynae-si, Leecheon-si, Dongcheon-si, Seoul, and left the left.

arrow