logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원천안지원 2014.11.26 2014가단101664
채무부존재확인
Text

1. As to the accident described in paragraph 1 of the attached list, it is stated in paragraph 2 of the same list against the plaintiff against the defendant.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff entered into the instant insurance contract with B with respect to B 15 tons dump trucks in the name of B (hereinafter “instant truck”), and the Defendant suffered pressure pressure conververging in both sides of the instant accident and the 1st century.

B. Meanwhile, the terms and conditions of the instant insurance contract relating to the instant accident are as follows.

[10] Liability for damages (personal compensation I, personal compensation II, and personal compensation)

1.(1) An insurance company shall compensate for any loss sustained by the insured as a result of an accident of the insured motor vehicle which occurred during the possession, use or management of the insured motor vehicle, in case where the insured has killed or injured any other person, or has removed or damaged any other property;

2. The scope of the insured (1) (3) a person who uses or manages an insured motor vehicle with the consent of the registered insured (1) as stated in the insurance policy (hereinafter referred to as the "registered motor vehicle")

1. (1) An insurance company shall be bound to compensate for any loss incurred by the insured when the insured dies or is injured due to an accident of the insured motor vehicle occurring during the possession, use, or management of the insured motor vehicle;

[14] Matters that an insurance company does not compensate for (exempt matters)

1. General exemption items (4) self-physical accidents (applicable to business and business automobile insurance) and (1) The insured has no dispute over losses (applicable to recognition), Gap evidence Nos. 1-3, Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 2 (including additional numbers), and the purport of the whole pleadings;

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. Plaintiff 1’s use or management of the instant truck, which is an insured automobile, with the consent of the named insured person B, does not constitute “Nam” as stipulated in the terms and conditions of the instant insurance contract.

Therefore, regarding the accident of this case.

arrow