계약무효확인 등
1. The insurance contract entered in the Appendix 1 List concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is invalid.
2. The defendant.
Facts of recognition
A. On May 4, 2004, the Plaintiff concluded an insurance contract with the Defendant, the insured, and the beneficiary as the Defendant listed in the separate sheet No. 1 (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).
B. From February 8, 2006 to April 17, 2006, the Defendant was hospitalized for 69 days with a birth examination for 69 days, and was hospitalized for 619 days in total as shown in the attached Table 2 from around that time to November 30, 2013. The Defendant received insurance proceeds of KRW 34,540,000 in total according to the insurance contract of this case.
C. From August 26, 1997 to December 15, 2006, the 15th insurance contracts, including the instant insurance contracts, as the insured are corrected on June 30, 2004.
was concluded as described above.
The sum of the premiums that the defendant shall pay every month according to each insurance contract above is 497,035 won.
From May 2006 to December 31, 2015, the Defendant received insurance proceeds of not less than 300 million won in total from insurance companies including the Plaintiff.
[Ground of recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap's statements in Gap's 3 through 5, the Insurance Development Institute, Korea Post, M&C life insurance, Samsung Life Insurance, Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd., AIA life insurance, and interesting life insurance Co., Ltd., as a result of fact-finding or order to submit documents, the purport of the entire pleadings and the judgment
A. In light of the circumstances where the Defendant entered into multiple insurance contracts and repeated hospitalization for a long time as to the degree of injury or disease, etc., the instant insurance contract was concluded for the purpose of the Defendant’s wrongful acquisition of insurance proceeds through multiple insurance contracts, and thus, is null and void contrary to good morals and other social order. Accordingly, the Defendant’s unjust enrichment of KRW 34,540,000, which was paid to the Plaintiff under the instant insurance contract.