난소절제술이 약관상 ‘치유’ 목적에 해당되는지 여부 - 대법원 2021. 9. 9. 선고 2021다234368 판결을 중심으로 -

Abstract

The number of cancer patients is continuously increasing in Korea. Cancer accounts for the highest percentage of deaths in Koreans. As a result, the number of people who join cancer insurance products is steadily increasing to prepare for cancer. Those who have contracted a cancer insurance expect to be able to be fully funded through their insurance products. However, although people have joined cancer insurance, they have not been able to receive the insurance money properly and related disputes are increasing. The clause of cancer insurance and conditions of this case stipulate that if the disability payment rate is more than 50% due to the same cause other than the same disaster or disaster, the premium payment is exempted. The subject judgment was that the plaintiff who was diagnosed with Atypical Combined Endometriosis performed ovarian resection, and the loss of both ovaries was subject to the exemption of premium payment under the insurance clause. However, the term ‘treatment’ was used in the subject judgment, and most of the other clauses of cancer insurance use the expression of ‘direct treatment purpose of cancer'. Therefore, it is not desirable to interpret the object judgment as the same standard with other cases. Therefore, even if the treatment purpose and preventive purpose are exist in any medical treatment for the treatment of cancer, the medical treatment should be centered on the therapeutic purpose in order to be a ‘direct treatment of cancer’ under the clause of cancer insurance.