A. D (the deceased on November 22, 2013, hereinafter “the deceased”) concluded an insurance contract on June 2, 201 between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff listed in the separate sheet by telephone (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. According to the terms and conditions of the instant insurance contract, where the contractor or the insured (the insured) passes the diagnosis procedure by means of a substitute diagnosis or medication, or where the company proves that the contract was concluded by an obvious fraud intent, such as hiding and subscribing to the diagnosis before the date of forgery or subscription, after obtaining the confirmation of the diagnosis of cancer or business before the date of alteration or subscription, the contract may be cancelled within five years (within one month from the date of knowing the fraudulent fact) from the date of commencement of guarantee of the first contract.

§ 26 (c).

Medical doctor E, who treated the Deceased, shall be as follows:

① At the time of the first-aid vehicle as of May 26, 201, explaining that blood transfusions need to be shown. ③ On May 27, 2011, blood inspection was conducted on the same day, and the prescription of the internal police on May 31, 201, the captain of the F Hospital and the prescription of the internal police station: (a) on the day of the inspection, the result was explained on May 31, 201; and (b) on the day of the inspection, the explanation was presented on the day of the inspection; (c) on the ground that the tractic opinion of the tracing may have the possibility of the above cancer, it was explained that the examination is necessary to confirm the implementation of internal organizational inspection, the result of organizational inspection, and (CT), and thus, it is doubtful that the laculic surgery was carried out on May 31, 2011, and the implementation of the laculological autopsy is sufficiently doubtful to implement the above lac method by using the lacary organ.