(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.02.12 2019나30739

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2020.02.12 2019나30739

보험금

Text

1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

Reasons

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, except for the addition of “the second higher portion” and “3. additional determination” to the allegations added by the plaintiff in this court, and thus, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable in accordance with

2. Of the Schedules inserted in Section 1. A., the phrase “General Injury Death (Special Agreement”)” is described as “Death (Death Special Agreement, 80 years of age)”, and the phrase “General Injury Death (Death Special Agreement, 90 years of age)” in Section 9, respectively, is described as “Death Death (Death Special Agreement, 90 years of age)”.

1. (c) The end of the paragraph “Death (hereinafter referred to as “Death”).” part of “Death (hereinafter referred to as “Death”)” is understood as “accident (hereinafter referred to as “the instant accident”) and “C.”. 2.b.

2) The evidence presented in Paragraph 1 of Paragraph 1 of the same Article added “the result of this Court’s inquiry and reply to the inquiry of the JJ union,” and “the result of this Court’s inquiry and reply to the Defendant” respectively.

2) In the end of paragraph (a) of “n’n.e., the deceased’s insurance was not renewed after being maintained until February 2016, and it was not due to the deceased’s loss of membership as a member of the J association. This is because the deceased did not pay the deceased despite the change in the method of sharing the deceased’s burden of paying KRW 10,000 to the members of the J association from 2016.” In addition, “the deceased’s 4th page” includes “the deceased’s income obtained by selling agricultural crops, or is not reported,” after the “the deceased’s 8th page 8th page 7.”

7. If the deceased notified his occupation as a farmer while entering into the instant insurance contract, or stated at least that he works as a farmer on the part of concurrent, secondary, or seasonal work, the Defendant is not aware of the fact that there is a risk that the deceased would be at least a decrease in the blood transfusion.

참조조문

-민사소송법 제420조

유사 판례

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.02.12 2019나30739

-서울중앙지방법원 2020.2.12. 선고 2019나30739 판결

-서울고등법원 2016.10.20 2016누38183

-서울고등법원 2017.11.01 2017누42219

-서울고등법원 2016.02.04 2014누66351