손해배상(기)
1. The plaintiffs' respective claims against the defendants are dismissed in entirety.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiffs are married to E, and Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant C”) are insurers who concluded an insurance contract with E, and Defendant D is an insurance solicitor of Defendant C who recommended and arranged to conclude an insurance contract with E.
B. From April 27, 2009 to March 17, 2011, E concluded eight insurance contracts as shown in the separate sheet with Defendant C through Defendant C (hereinafter collectively referred to as “each of the instant insurance contracts”; and, when referring to an individual contract, hereinafter referred to as “instant insurance contract”). On November 10, 2017, the policyholders and beneficiaries of the instant insurance contracts were Plaintiff A, and the policyholders and beneficiaries of the instant insurance contracts were changed to Plaintiff B, respectively.
After 2012, 142,90,00 won for termination of the total paid-in premium (excluding the compulsory paid-in premium) after 2012,30 won for KRW 142,90,00 for KRW 2,402,477 won for KRW 238,220,00 won for KRW 639,00 for KRW 639,058,100 for KRW 310,492,00 for KRW 1,50,000 for KRW 2,938,126 won for KRW 431,64,00 for KRW 1,50,000 for KRW 1,305,40,500 for KRW 1,305,48,50 for KRW 1,300,500 for KRW 5,489,500 for KRW 1,500 for KRW 1,50,000 for KRW 1,509,2094
C. Meanwhile, E did not pay almost the insurance premium after the lapse of the respective mandatory payment period of each of the instant insurance contracts (two years). On March 30, 2018, the details of total insurance premium as of March 30, 2018 (hereinafter collectively referred to as “instant insurance premium”), additional payment (excluding mandatory payment insurance premium) after 2012, and termination refund are as follows.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1 through 5, Eul evidence 10 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply), the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The Defendants asserted that they violated the duty of explanation and suitability principle as follows.
Therefore, the Plaintiffs.