2019Da204869 Undue gains

Plaintiff:

Attorney Kim Young-chul, Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant

Defendant

Law Firm Newly Inserted by Act No. 1014, Feb. 1, 201>

Cheongju District Court Decision 2018Na7420 Decided December 19, 2018

February 27, 2020

The judgment of the court below is reversed.

The judgment of the first instance court shall be revoked, and the lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the plaintiff.

1. We examine the Defendant’s grounds of appeal.

The policyholder has the right to change the beneficiary (Article 733(1) of the Commercial Act). The right to change the beneficiary is a right to form an insurance beneficiary, and a policyholder may freely exercise the right without the consent of the insurer or the beneficiary, and the change takes effect immediately by exercise of the right. However, the policyholder cannot oppose the insurer without notifying the insurer after the change of the beneficiary (Article 734(1) of the Commercial Act). In light of the legal nature of the right to change the beneficiary and the interpretation of the Commercial Act, it is reasonable to deem that the change of the beneficiary is a sole act without the other party. As long as the expression of intent of change of the beneficiary is objectively confirmed, the change of the beneficiary occurs even if the expression of

For the reasons indicated in its reasoning, the lower court determined that the beneficiary was changed from the Defendant to the Plaintiff on the premise that the Deceased expressed to the Defendant his intent to change the beneficiary of the instant insurance contract objectively.

In light of the aforementioned legal principles and records, the lower court cannot be deemed to have erred by violating the rules of evidence or failing to exhaust all necessary deliberations, as alleged in the grounds of appeal.

2. We examine ex officio the lawfulness of the instant lawsuit.

According to the reasoning of the lower judgment and the record, due to the exercise of the deceased’s right to change the beneficiary on December 2, 2016, the beneficiary was changed from the Defendant to the Plaintiff, and the deceased on October 8, 2017 died.

As can be known that the Plaintiff acquired the instant insurance claim, there is no legal interest in seeking the transfer of the instant insurance claim to the Defendant and the implementation of the procedure for notifying the transfer thereof. Therefore, even though the instant lawsuit is inappropriate because there is no legal interest in the lawsuit, and thus, it is inappropriate for the lower court to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim, and subsequently accepted the Plaintiff’s claim following the revocation of the first instance judgment, the lower court cannot be reversed

However, the plaintiff, a sole heir of the deceased, pointed out that the insurer may claim the payment of insurance money by notifying the beneficiary of the change from the defendant to the plaintiff.

3. Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed. Since this case is sufficient for the Supreme Court to directly render a judgment, the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the lawsuit of this case is dismissed. The total costs of the lawsuit are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Kim Jong-soo

Justices Kwon Soon-il

Chief Justice Lee Ki-taik

Justices Park Jung-hwa