1. The lawsuit of this case shall be dismissed.

2. The costs of retrial shall be borne by the defendant;

purport, purport, and.

1.The following facts of basic facts shall be apparent in the records or obvious to this Court:

Insurance types: The content of guarantee of the deceased: Insurance period, such as KRW 200 million of the death insurance amount when the insured is injured by a traffic injury: From May 23, 2014 to May 23, 203, 2034: Insurance premium of the deceased, statutory inheritors at the time of the death of the deceased: KRW 30,000 per month, and 20 years of payment period.

A. On May 23, 2014, the network D (hereinafter “the network”) concluded an insurance contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with the following content. On May 29, 2014, the network concluded an insurance contract with the Korea Non-Life Insurance Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “K non-Life Insurance”).

B. As the Deceased died on September 2, 2014 (hereinafter “instant accident”), the Plaintiffs, the bereaved family members of the Deceased, filed a lawsuit against the Defendant and the Seoul Central District Court No. 2015Gahap516088 against payment of the traffic injury death insurance and the injury death insurance under each of the instant insurance contracts, as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2015Gahap516088.

C. On September 22, 2016, the Seoul Central District Court rendered a judgment that most of the plaintiffs' claims were accepted (excluding partial damages for delay) on the grounds that “the instant accident constitutes death resulting from traffic injury as stipulated in each of the above insurance contracts, and it is difficult to deem that the deceased concluded the instant insurance contract with the intent to illegally acquire insurance proceeds, or that the instant accident constitutes intentional accidents, which are the reasons for the Defendant’s exemption.”

The case non-life insurance filed an appeal against the above judgment, but the plaintiffs and the defendant did not appeal and the judgment against the defendant became final and conclusive separately.

2. The first instance court of the case subject to a review on the gist of the Defendant’s assertion ordered G, a creditor of the deceased, to submit a recording file of the currency with the deceased, and G is justified.