logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2019.04.11 2018나51593
손해배상
Text

1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

3.Paragraph 1 of the text of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be subject.

Reasons

1. In a civil trial of facts recognized, even if it is not bound by the finding of facts in a criminal trial, the facts found guilty of the same facts are valuable evidence, and thus, it cannot be acknowledged that there is no special circumstance where it is difficult to adopt a judgment of facts in a criminal trial in light of other evidence submitted in the civil trial, unless it is acknowledged that it is difficult to adopt a judgment

(Supreme Court Decision 97Da24276 delivered on September 30, 1997). The following facts can be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence Nos. 1, 6, and 7.

On October 16, 2006, the Defendant concluded 10 insurance contracts with the Plaintiff and 11 insurance companies from August 1, 2002 to September 2, 2008.

B. On January 16, 2007, the Defendant made a false statement to the effect that, “from December 4, 2006, the Plaintiff was hospitalized in the E Hospital for reasons of the need for long-term hospitalized treatment due to diseases, such as cage cages at l93, 3-4, 4-5, etc. at 3 times on the left side, and was discharged from the hospital after being treated until December 26, 2006, for the same symptoms as of the date of discharge, the Defendant was hospitalized in the E Hospital for the same symptoms, and received hospitalized treatment for 21 days from that time to January 15, 2007.”

However, in light of the following circumstances, even though the above disease was relatively insignificant and the need for long-term hospital treatment was not occurred, the defendant was hospitalized for an unnecessary long-term period as above with an intention to receive a large amount of insurance proceeds.

1 The defendant, upon being investigated into the suspicion of fraud, stated that it is not excessive hospitalization compared to the state of disease, and it is difficult to have a pain due to pain, and received hospital treatment not through hospital treatment due to the doctor's recommendation for hospitalization. Prior to that time, there was no timely hospitalization at hospital, and it is impossible to provide hospital treatment.

(2) The reasons for hospitalization shall be the reason for such hospitalization.

arrow