2. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

3. The total cost of the lawsuit.

2. The reasoning of this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is as follows, and this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part of the Plaintiff’s assertion is cited in accordance with the main sentence of

The provisions of paragraphs (1), (3) of each week shall be deleted, (2), (4), (5) and (3) of each week, and "this court" of each part of the basis for the recognition of the head of each local government to "the first instance court".

ARTICLE 1-

A. On April 26, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into an insurance contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendants as follows. (A) On April 26, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into a contract with Defendant A and the beneficiary of the death benefit as the beneficiary of the Defendant A and the beneficiary of the death benefit into the same content as the name of the goods indicated in the separate sheet, the number of securities, the insurance period, the content of the guarantee, and the insurance premium.

After that, the contractor and the surviving beneficiary were changed to Defendant B as shown in the attached Form.

The judgment shall be made on the absence of dispute, Gap Nos. 1 and 5-1, 2.

A. As to whether a policyholder entered into a multiple insurance contract with intent to illegally acquire the relevant insurance proceeds, even if there is no evidence to directly acknowledge such fact, such purpose may be ratified based on all the circumstances, including the policyholder’s occupation and property status, the developments leading up to concluding multiple insurance contracts, the scale of insurance contracts and the circumstances after concluding the insurance

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da12115 Decided May 28, 2009, etc.). B.

According to the evidence as seen earlier prior to the invalidity of the instant insurance contract, the Defendants concluded the instant insurance contract with Defendant A as the insured from about six months after the conclusion of the instant insurance contract, and concluded multiple insurance contracts that include the coverage similar to the instant insurance contract, five of which was purchased around October 201, the remainder four of which was purchased around September 201, the amount of monthly insurance premium borne by the Defendants exceeds KRW 5.60,000,000; Defendant A did not have any income reported after 207; and Defendant A was on October 201.