Whether the act of borrowing money by the head of a branch office of an insurance company is included in his business

Where an insurance company borrows a loan which is not for the purpose business, it is subject to strict regulations, such as obtaining prior approval from the competent Minister, which regulates the current month of the financial institution. In particular, since the branch office is a shop which handles only mechanical and auxiliary affairs under the direction and supervision of the main and branch office, the borrowing of the loan by the said branch office does not belong to its business.

Article 756 of the Civil Act

Supreme Court Decision 74Da1169 Delivered on November 12, 1974

Kim Jin-ship

Maritime Fire Insurance Co., Ltd., Counsel for the defendant-appellant

Busan District Court Decision 79Na38 delivered on June 29, 1979

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal by the plaintiff's attorney are examined.

In the case where the defendant company (the head office) borrows funds for a purpose other than the purpose business based on evidence, it is subject to strict regulations such as obtaining prior approval from the competent Minister that it borrows the current month at a financial institution. In particular, the branch office recognizes that the borrowing of funds does not belong to its business as a mechanical or auxiliary store under the direction and supervision of the main office and branch office, and it is difficult to recognize the lending of funds by the non-party of the head office in Busan as a business of the head office of the insurance company that is not limited to the limited business, and thus, it is difficult to recognize the lending of funds as a business of the head office of the insurance company that is not limited to the limited business, and thus

It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench's opinion on the judgment of the original court and the dissenting opinion.

Justices Jeong Tae-won (Presiding Justice)