A. The Plaintiff is an insurance company that entered into an insurance contract with the Defendant as shown in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”). The Defendant is a policyholder and a beneficiary of the instant insurance contract.

B. Around 16:50 on January 30, 2018, the insured of the instant insurance contract and C (date of birth), the father of the Defendant, was discovered to the Defendant with rare consciousness at his home.

C was sent to the Nam-gu Incheon E F Hospital according to the defendant's report immediately after the discovery, and was killed on January 30, 2018.

C. The Defendant alleged that C’s death constitutes grounds for the payment of insurance proceeds stipulated in the instant insurance contract, and filed a claim with the Plaintiff for the payment of insurance proceeds under the instant insurance contract.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute (including the fact that the defendant does not clearly dispute), entry of Gap evidence 1, purport of whole pleadings]

2. The Plaintiff’s summary of the assertion died due to the internal causes of the C, which is the king of high blood pressure, and thus, the death does not constitute the death of injury as stipulated in the instant insurance contract, and thus does not constitute the grounds for the payment of insurance proceeds under the instant insurance contract.

However, inasmuch as the Defendant asserts that the death of C constitutes grounds for the payment of insurance proceeds and sought the payment of the insurance proceeds to the Plaintiff, the Plaintiff seeks confirmation that there is no liability against the Defendant for the payment of insurance proceeds.

3. Determination

A. In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of existence of a pecuniary obligation, if the plaintiff, who is the debtor, claims to deny the fact that the cause of the obligation occurred by specifying the first claim, the defendant, the creditor, bears the burden of proving the facts that the legal relationship exists.

(See Supreme Court Decision 97Da45259 delivered on March 13, 1998, etc.). B.

In this case, the defendant is the cause and feasibility of the plaintiff's obligation to pay insurance money, and the amount of insurance money.