2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

A. On February 8, 2013, the Plaintiffs concluded each of the following insurance contracts with the Defendant (hereinafter “each of the instant insurance contracts”) via the brokerage of Nonparty C (former: D:) (a) who is an insurance solicitor, respectively.

1. 원고 A 보험종류 : (무)리셋플러스변액연금1형(스텝업플러스-적립형) (8R3R21DJ2) 증권번호 : E 피보험자 : F 보험기간 : 60세 연금지급기간 : 종신 납입기간 : 10년 보험료 : 월 5,000,000원 납입방법 : 월납 (120회 납입) 수익자 : 만기 - 원고 A / 입원ㆍ장애 - F / 사망 - 원고 A

2. 원고 B 보험종류 : (무)리셋플러스변액연금1형(스텝업플러스-적립형) (8R3R21DJ2) 증권번호 : G 피보험자 : H 보험기간 : 60세 연금지급기간 : 종신 납입기간 : 10년 보험료 : 월 5,000,000원 납입방법 : 월납 (120회 납입) 수익자 : 만기 - 원고 B / 입원ㆍ장애 - H / 사망 - 원고 B

B. From February 8, 2013 to December 26, 2014, the Plaintiffs paid KRW 115,000,000, respectively, as the insurance premium of each of the instant insurance contracts, over 23 occasions.

C. From February 11, 2015, the Plaintiffs requested the Defendant to return the insurance premium paid by the Plaintiffs, including: (a) from around February 11, 2015, the Plaintiffs: (b) “C provided a false explanation with respect to the insurance product “Sclflass Pension” (hereinafter “instant insurance product”); and (c) Nonparty F and H (A) did not sign the insurance contract and the product description; and (d) filed a civil petition with the Plaintiffs to the effect that each of the instant insurance contracts is null and void, as they did not sign the insurance contract and the product description.”

【Unsatisfied Facts, Gap’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, 8, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The plaintiffs asserted that they either cancel or terminate each insurance contract of this case on the grounds of fraud or mistake, since the following problems exist in the process of concluding each insurance contract of this case.