2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

A. On August 6, 2007, the Defendant concluded an insurance contract with the Plaintiff as the insured on August 6, 2007 (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) as indicated in the attached Table 1, which covers the daily allowances for hospitalization of diseases, expenses for disease, expenses for hospitalization of diseases, expenses for hospital treatment of diseases, expenses for medical treatment of disease patients, expenses for surgery of specific diseases, and expenses for treatment of strokes

B. As between September 17, 1996 and October 17, 2012, the Defendant, including the instant insurance contract, concluded 25 insurance contracts including the instant insurance contract as the insured as shown in attached Table 2. Among them, 17 insurance contracts including the instant insurance contract were concluded between July 7, 2006 and November 16, 2007.

C. From December 13, 2007 to May 3, 2013 (1,969), the Defendant received hospital treatment for 923 days between the Defendant and the Defendant. On the ground of an insured incident during the above period, the Defendant received KRW 40,488,901, including KRW 16,590,00,00 as stated in the insurance contract of this case as the insurance money under the instant insurance contract, including KRW 16,590,00.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim

A. The Plaintiff asserts that since the Defendant concluded the instant insurance contract with a view to unjust acquisition of insurance money through multiple insurance contracts, the instant insurance contract is invalid against good morals and other social order under Article 103 of the Civil Act, and thus, the Plaintiff sought confirmation of invalidity as it constitutes invalid, and that the Defendant was paid in accordance with the instant insurance contract, the insurance amounting to KRW 40,488,901, which is null and void, around the Defendant, was in accordance with the instant insurance contract, which is null and void. In the preliminary case, the Plaintiff asserts that 40,488,901 won was sought for return of unjust enrichment

In regard to this, the defendant concluded the insurance contract of this case in purely against the risk of life and body, etc., and the defendant shall acquire the insurance money unlawfully.