[2] The case holding that the above insurance contract cannot be deemed null and void unless the insurance accident (the death or the first-class disability) occurred before the conclusion of the insurance contract even though Gap was diagnosed with the root symptoms before the conclusion of the insurance contract

1. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, the court below held that the "in a case where an insurance accident has already occurred" under Article 644 of the Commercial Act includes a case where the occurrence of the insurance accident is expected inevitably due to the lapse of time, and rejected all of the plaintiffs' claims for the insurance proceeds of this case on the ground that at the time when the second insurance contract of this case was concluded, the non-party had already seen the symptoms of the flusium flusium (mychisiumhysium) and the flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium flusium

2. However, Article 644 of the Commercial Act provides that the insurance contract shall be invalidated when the insurance accident occurred at the time of the insurance contract. Thus, even if the occurrence of the insurance accident is inevitable upon the lapse of the time of the snowhouse, the insurance contract shall not be invalidated by applying Article 644 of the Commercial Act, unless the insurance accident occurs at the time of the conclusion of the insurance contract. Although the non-party was diagnosed as a documentary evidence before the conclusion of the second insurance contract, the above insurance contract shall not be null and void unless the insurance accident (the death or the first-class disability) occurred before the conclusion of the second insurance contract.

If so, the court below should have deliberated and decided at any time on the non-party when a state of disability of class 1 occurs, and it should further have deliberated and decided on the termination of the insurance contract due to the defendant's violation of duty of disclosure and the plaintiffs' claim for exclusion period. However, the court below erred by misapprehending the legal principles on the effect of the objective confirmation of the insurance accident of Article 644 of the Commercial Act, which affected the conclusion of the judgment. The plaintiffs' assertion pointing this out is with merit.

3. Therefore, the lower judgment is reversed, and the case is remanded to the lower court for further proceedings consistent with this Opinion. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Lee Hong-hoon (Presiding Justice)