logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대전지방법원 2017.09.01 2017나103557
채무부존재확인
Text

1. The defendant (Counterclaim plaintiff)'s appeal is dismissed.

2. The defendant-Counterclaim plaintiff's counterclaim extended by this court.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the cases where the following is added to the judgment of the first instance, thereby citing it as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The judgment below is added to the part of the “determination on the claim for the completion of extinctive prescription” No. 6 of the judgment of the first instance. The Defendant asserts that the extinctive prescription of the above insurance proceeds will run on September 29, 201 when the judgment of the first instance court becomes final and conclusive on September 29, 201, on the ground that, in a case where the insured receives accident compensation under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act, the insurance company is entitled to only compensate for excess damages, and the amount of compensation pursuant to the industrial accident compensation insurance against the Defendant is determined. As such, the Defendant asserts that the extinctive prescription of the above insurance proceeds will run on September 29, 201 when the judgment of the administrative litigation seeking the

According to the statement, it is recognized that the insured is exempt from liability II by the insurer's terms and conditions as follows: "If the insured uses the insured motor vehicle for an employer's business, other employees engaged in the employer's business who are entitled to receive accident compensation under the Industrial Accident Compensation Insurance Act: Provided, That if the damage suffered by the insured exceeds the scope of compensation under the same Act, the excess damage shall be compensated."

However, in a case where an insurance company has the aforementioned exemption clause, if there are parts that can be compensated for industrial accident compensation insurance benefits out of the damages to be compensated for by insurance contracts, it shall be exempted from liability for damages of the insurance company and compensated for industrial accident compensation insurance benefits pursuant to the above exemption clause, unless there are any special circumstances. However, it is an employee of the insured who has the liability for compensation, which is a requirement for application of

arrow