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

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

A. On January 19, 2018, the Plaintiff is an insurance company that entered into an insurance contract with the Defendant as shown in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”). The Defendant is a policyholder and a beneficiary of the instant insurance contract.

B. According to the instant insurance contract, where the father C (date of birth) of the Defendant, the insured, died due to injury, the Plaintiff is obliged to pay KRW 100 million to the Defendant, the beneficiary.

C. At around 16:50 on January 30, 2018, C discovered that food was rarely discovered to the Defendant. According to the Defendant’s report immediately after the discovery, C was sent to the Nam-gu Incheon Metropolitan E Hospital and was under medical treatment, but died on January 30, 2018.

The defendant alleged that the death of C constitutes grounds for the payment of insurance proceeds stipulated in the insurance contract of this case, and the plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of insurance proceeds under the insurance contract of this case.

[Grounds for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 1 to 6, the purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Summary of the parties’ assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion seeks confirmation that there is no obligation under the instant insurance contract on the following grounds.

1) The instant insurance contract is null and void. The instant insurance contract is the life insurance for another person that the Defendant, the policyholder, was the insured of the other person, and the death of the other person, C as an insured event. In this case, although C obtained written consent from the insured, the instant insurance contract is null and void since C did not have any written consent, and therefore, C does not have any obligation to pay insurance money under the instant insurance contract. 2) Even if the instant insurance contract is null and void on the ground of the Plaintiff’s breach of duty of disclosure, C was subject to high blood pressure treatment. However, the Defendant and C did not notify all of such fact at the time of entering