보험계약 무효확인 등
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
1. The Plaintiff asserted that the Plaintiff entered into the instant insurance contract with the Defendant on December 24, 2009, and paid KRW 20,930,824 as the insurance money after hospital treatment on a total of 482 days from March 3, 2010 to May 2015. The Defendant entered into the instant insurance contract for the purpose of unjust acquisition of the insurance money by entering into a false or exaggerated hospitalization with multiple guaranteed insurance policies as shown in the attached Table 2. The Plaintiff asserted that it is null and void against good morals and other social order as provided in Article 103 of the Civil Act, and sought the return of unjust enrichment equivalent to the insurance money paid along with the confirmation of invalidity.
2. In light of the following circumstances, it is difficult to see that the Defendant entered into the instant insurance contract with the sole evidence submitted by the Plaintiff for the purpose of illegally acquiring insurance proceeds, and the Plaintiff’s claim is dismissed on the grounds that there is no other evidence to acknowledge it
In addition to insurance maintained as shown in the attached Table 2, it seems that the defendant worked for a company for the purpose of insurance agency, brokerage, etc., the defendant has repeated purchase and termination of multiple types of insurance as shown in attached Table 3.
(B) In light of the income level and property relationship between the Defendant and the Defendant’s spouse, it is difficult to view that the Defendant’s insurance premium to be paid at the time of entering into the instant insurance contract is excessive.
(을1∽3, 순천시와 순천세무서장의 각 사실조회회신, 2016. 8. 1.자 문서송부서). 건강보험급여내역이 확인되는 2002.경 이후의 치료내역 등에 의하면 피고는 자신을 직접 진찰한 의사의 진단에 따라 입원한 것으로 보이고(을4,5, 국민건강보험공단의 사실조회회신), 그와 같은 의사의 진단이 잘못된 것이라고 의심할 만한 뚜렷한 증거가 없다.