누수사고로 인한 손해방지비용의 범위 — 최근 판결을 중심으로 —

Abstract

The issue of recovery under a liability insurance policy for the insured's own expenses in preventing, minimizing, or investigating a loss is generally determined in part by the terms of Commercial Act §720. And many policies that often called ‘sue and labor clauses’ contractually impose the same duty on the part of the insured to take necessary steps and spend sums on preventing further loss or preventing the occurrence of loss. However, the cost used to prevent future new insurance accidents is not a loss prevention cost. In recent years, in the event of a leak in the liability insurance covering the liability incurred in building ownership or daily life, there has been an increasing dispute over whether the insured‘s expenses are the cost of preventing damages. This is because it is difficult to find out the cause of the leak, and the continuing flow of water continues make confused the extent to which the policyholder or the insured should repair. There is no Supreme Court ruling on this matter yet. The author analyzed 3 cases of lower court decisions. It also examines a case of mediation by the Financial Supervisory Service's Financial Dispute Mediation Committee. It is understood that the court only acknowledges the cost of the necessary first aid. Therefore, the policyholder should bear the cost to prevent future accidents. This conclusion may be a standard for handling work in compensation practice and may be referred to in the dispute settlement process of the Financial Supervisory Service.