The defendant.

A. On February 8, 2013, the Plaintiff concluded the following insurance contracts with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant insurance contracts”) through the brokerage of Nonparty C (former name: D) who is an insurance solicitor, around February 8, 2013:

)을 체결하였다. 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 / 입원ㆍ장애 - H / 사망 - 원고 2) 원고는 2013. 2. 8.부터 2014. 12. 26.까지 23회에 걸쳐 이 사건 보험계약의 보험료로 합계 115,000,000원을 납입하였다.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, 3-2, Eul evidence 1-2, 2-2, 3-2, 3-2, 5-2, and 5-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

B. The Plaintiff, as to the validity of the instant insurance contract, asserts that the instant insurance contract, which covers the death of another person as an insured event, is null and void because H did not sign the written subscription for the insurance contract.

On the other hand, Article 731 (1) of the Commercial Act provides that "any insurance contract which covers the death of another person as an insured accident shall obtain the written consent of the other person at the time of conclusion of the insurance contract," is a mandatory provision and an insurance contract concluded in violation of this provision is null and void (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decisions 96Da37084, Nov. 22, 1996; 2003Da62125, Apr. 23, 2004); each of the facts recognized earlier; evidence No. 9, evidence No. 1-2, and No. 6-1, No. 1-2, and No. 6-1, the purport of each of the arguments is shown in each of the facts that the plaintiff was designated as the beneficiary at the time of the death of the other person (H) under the insurance contract of this case; the insurance subscription date of this case is February 8, 2013; and the time when the counselor of the defendant et al. was confirmedd to the plaintiff as the insured, etc.