According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court below, since the above insurance business is a system that allows the defendant to contribute a certain amount of insurance premium to 00 won in order to meet financial demand, and to eliminate or reduce economic apprehensions by paying insurance money to the person who actually suffered from the above 00 trillion won, the court below held that the above 10 trillion won is not a 0-year membership fee to 0-year membership fee or 0-year membership fee to 10-year membership fee for the above 0-year membership fee and 0-year membership fee to 10-year membership fee for the above 0-year membership fee and 10-year membership fee to 0-year membership fee for the above 0-year membership fee and 10-year membership fee for the above 0-year membership fee to be paid in advance, the defendant shall be a 0-year membership fee for the above 00-year membership fee to 000-year membership fee and 200-year membership fee for the above 00-year membership fee.

However, the Insurance Business Act not only requires the approval of the Minister of Finance and Economy in consideration of the impact of the insurance business on the state and the social and economic life due to the organization and sociality of the insurance business, but also provides various regulations on the supervision of the business. In light of the spirit of the above law for the regulation of the insurance business, the scope of the insurance business shall be interpreted by considering its substance and economic nature in substance without referring to its name or legal form (see Supreme Court Decision 87Do2172 delivered on January 31, 1989).

Based on the facts acknowledged by the court below, if the payment of a certain amount is made, regardless of the existence of the member's death, if seven years have passed since the member joined the above commercial association or 700 times or more after the member's death, it shall be deemed as a type of insurance with the nature of life-mix insurance. It shall not be deemed as a type of insurance with the nature of insurance with the equivalent amount of the insurance premium, even if the member is required to pay a certain amount of the insurance premium at the time of the death of another member under the terms and conditions, even if the other member is required to pay a certain amount of the insurance premium at the time of the death of another member under the terms and conditions, it does not necessarily go against the essence of the insurance, and it is difficult to say that there is no contribution of the insurance premium before the occurrence of the accident.

In addition, even if it is decided that the payment of the solatium shall not be made to the deceased within 100 days after the member joined the Trade Council, it shall be the effective time of the insurer's liability for the payment of the insurance proceeds, and such special agreement does not violate the nature of the insurance, and it shall not be interpreted as contrary to the purport of the insurance, and shall not be interpreted as being contrary to the fact that the rate of death for the qualifications of the standing member is less than the age group, and that the payment of the solatium shall not be made in the event of the death before the lapse of 100 days, or that the amount of the solatium paid at the time of the death is increased annually as the period of the membership as the standing member is long as the period of the membership as much as the number of days of the contribution of the standing member increases, in order to maintain balance between the payment and the consideration.

Therefore, when considering the actual aspect of the business operation operated by the defendant, it is necessary to operate the insurance business regardless of the name of the business or the name of the contribution or the payment amount in the case of the accident, in that it contributes a certain amount of money under the name of the subscription fee and the ordinary assistance expense in order to meet the property demand in the event that a large number of members who are in a dynamic economic risk are dead, and pays a certain amount of money in the case of the accident. The defendant's operation of the business of this case without permission constitutes a violation of the Insurance Business Act.

Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below that found the defendant not guilty on the grounds as seen above is erroneous in the misapprehension of the legal principles under Article 5 (1) of the Insurance Business Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment, and therefore, the argument that points out this out

Therefore, the judgment of the court below is reversed, and the case is remanded to the court below. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Jong-soo (Presiding Justice) Lee Chang-soo Kim Jong-won