Depression After Traffic Accident Sequelae Leads to Extreme Choice... Supreme Court: "Direct Result of Injury"

'Insurance Claim Lawsuit' 1st Trial "Pay the Insurance Money" → 2nd Trial "No Causal Relationship"

[Asia Economy Reporter Heo Kyung-jun] The Supreme Court has ruled that death insurance benefits must be paid if a person suffering from depression as a sequela of a traffic accident makes an extreme choice.

The Supreme Court's 2nd Division (Presiding Justice Cheon Dae-yeop) announced on the 4th that it overturned the lower court's ruling, which dismissed the plaintiff's claim, in the appeal case filed by Mr. A against Hyundai Marine & Fire Insurance, and remanded the case to the Seoul Central District Court.

In September 2017, Mr. A crashed into a guardrail while driving. It was raining at the time of the accident, and Mr. A was trapped in the car until rescued. He was hospitalized for 10 days due to a concussion and other injuries.

From November of that year to March of the following year, Mr. A received treatment for depression as a sequela of the accident. However, he complained of symptoms such as trembling on rainy days and abnormal behavior during sleep. Later, when Mr. A's husband suddenly had a traffic accident, Mr. A made an extreme choice while nursing him.

Mr. A's son filed a lawsuit against the insurance company, demanding payment of 100 million won in traffic accident death insurance benefits for Mr. A. The insurance contract included a special clause that pays benefits if death occurs as a direct result of injuries caused by a traffic accident.

The first trial accepted Mr. A's son's claim and ordered the payment of the insurance money, but the second trial ruled in favor of the insurance company. The second trial court judged that it was difficult to see a direct causal relationship between Mr. A's extreme choice and depression.

However, the Supreme Court judged that "it is sufficient to infer that Mr. A died as a direct result of injuries caused by the traffic accident." The fact that Mr. A had not experienced mental illness or attempted extreme choices before the accident was also a basis for the judgment.

This content was produced with the assistance of AI translation services.