1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendants.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on the instant case is the same as that of the part concerning the basic facts set forth in Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, and thus, citing it as it is by the main text of Article 420

2. Judgment on the parties' arguments

A. 1) The Defendants concluded the instant insurance contract with the aim of illegally acquiring insurance proceeds through multiple insurance contracts, not to prepare for a pure risk against pure life, body, etc. Therefore, the instant insurance contract is null and void in violation of Article 103 of the Civil Act, and thus, the Defendants are obligated to seek confirmation, and the Defendants are obligated to return the amount equivalent to the insurance proceeds received under the instant insurance contract to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment. 2) The Defendants were hospitalized by Defendant A with a long-term illness at the time of undergoing an investigation by an insurance fraud consultation at the head of the Gwangju District Prosecutors’ Office.

It is difficult to readily conclude that Defendant A received or excessively hospitalized treatment. ② Defendant A was subject to a disposition of no suspicion on the grounds that it was difficult to conclude that he received or excessive hospitalized treatment; ② Defendant A was in the construction machinery rental business from February 1, 1996 to August 12, 2003; the mid-term contract and rental business from July 10, 200 to July 10, 2003; and the special cargo business from October 1, 2003 to December 26, 2005, and 4,000,000 won per month as he/she was engaged in the special cargo business; and the insurance contract of this case was null and void since he/she had an economic ability to pay insurance premiums since he/she operated wife C, wife F and botanical gardens, etc. from around 203 to obtain considerable profits.

B. In a case where a policyholder entered into an insurance contract with a view to unlawfully acquiring insurance proceeds through multiple insurance contracts, the payment of insurance proceeds pursuant to the insurance contract concluded for such purpose is deemed to have a speculative spirit to gain unjust profits by abusing the insurance contract, thereby promoting social reasonableness.