logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원 2015.09.10 2014나306348
보험금
Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. On August 2012, the Plaintiff concluded a collective insurance contract with the Defendant with the content that the Plaintiff’s employees were the insured (persons insured), and that the Plaintiff was the beneficiary of the insurance, with the content that the insured died during the period of insurance.

(hereinafter referred to as the “instant insurance”). B.

Article 17(1)1 of the Terms and Conditions on the Insurance of this case provides for an insured accident in which “the insured intentionally injures himself/herself” is not paid insurance money, and provides for exceptions to “the insured who caused the death of himself/herself by impairing himself/herself in a situation where it is impossible for him/her to make a free decision due to a defect

C. On January 1, 2006, the deceased A (hereinafter “the deceased”) was an employee of the Plaintiff, who was employed on January 1, 2006, insured by the instant insurance. On June 25, 2013, the deceased was discovered in the state where 3 meters high from the Nam-gu Gisan located in the Nam-gu Gidog and died.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 5-1, 2-2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion committed suicide in a situation where it is impossible to make a free decision due to mental illness, such as coercion and depression, which suffered from ordinary pain. This constitutes an exception to the exemption from liability for the payment of insurance money under the above terms and conditions, and thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the Plaintiff the death insurance money amounting to KRW 90 million and delay damages therefrom.

B. The death of the deceased alleged by the Defendant does not constitute “a case where he damages himself in a state of being unable to make a free decision,” which is an exception to the grounds for exemption stipulated in the terms and conditions of the instant insurance, and thus, cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s request

3. Determination

A. Whether the person committed suicide was dead in a state that is unable to make free decisions due to mental illness, etc.

arrow