보험에관한 소송
1. It is confirmed that an insurance contract concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendants is null and void.
2. The plaintiff, Ga.
Basic Facts
On August 5, 2005, Defendant B entered into the instant insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with the Plaintiff as shown in Appendix 1, and the instant insurance contract was changed on November 22, 2010 by the policyholder and the beneficiary to Defendant C, the mother of Defendant B.
The insurance contract of this case includes the security payment for hospitalization day and operating expenses when the insured is hospitalized due to a disease or injury, or performed by a specific disease.
Defendant B was hospitalized at D Hospital for a total of 1,539 days from November 10, 2005 to November 19, 2005, as shown in attached Table 2 from around that time to August 12, 2014, due to a light flasium disorder, knee-pathitis, knee-pathitis, typosis, and urology disease, etc., as shown in attached Table 2.
(hereinafter) Where it is necessary to individually specify the content of each treatment, it shall be specified by the sequence in Attached Table 2). [The grounds for recognition] of absence of dispute, the entries in Attached Table 1-5, and the purport of the whole argument of the Plaintiff, as a whole, Defendant B concluded a multiple security insurance contract including the instant insurance contract, and received excessive insurance proceeds after undergoing unnecessary hospitalized treatment for the purpose of unlawful acquisition.
Therefore, the instant insurance contract is null and void in violation of good morals and other social order stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Act. The Defendants, the beneficiary, are obliged to pay the Plaintiff insurance money and damages for delay received from the Plaintiff due to the return of unjust enrichment.
Judgment
Where a policyholder concludes an insurance contract for the purpose of unjust acquisition of insurance money through a large number of insurance contracts, the payment of insurance money according to the insurance contract concluded for this purpose would be in deviation from social reasonableness and reasonable diversification of risks by inducing speculative spirit to gain unjust profits through abuse of insurance contracts.