earticle

영어

On June 13, 2003 Korea Supreme Court (2001da42660) rendered that the insurance policy was terminated because the insured stopped marine transportation and returning the cargo intentionally, and also went beyond the ordinary course of transit. In respect of this case, the district court and the high court considered the meaning of insured accident, marine perils under ICC(A), exclusion under policy, terms and conditions for insurance cover and finally rendered that the insurer should establish the burden of proof, if not, the loss of cargo should be deemed as like insurance matter under all risk policy in ICC(A). However, the Korea Supreme Court interpreted the cause of termination in this insurance policy and considered the meaning of ordinary course of transit under the article 8 of ICC(A), and then finally reached the decision that the insured decided to stop the transportation and it was beyond the ordinary course of transit, then the insurer had no responsibility to pay any insurance money to the insured, even if any practical transportation was not taken. If there is any deviation of the ordinary court of transit, any existed marine transportation contract will be terminated and new marine transportation will be stared under MIA, 1906 and the article 8 of ICC(A). Therefore, I agree to the decision of court based upon the above theory.