1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part demanding the confirmation of non-existence of insurance money shall be revoked, and the revoked part.

1. Whether a claim for confirmation of non-existence of insurance money is lawful;

A. The plaintiff's summary of the plaintiff's assertion sought confirmation that the insurance contract of this case is null and void against the good morals and social order under Article 103 of the Civil Code, so there is no obligation of the plaintiff to pay the insurance money to the defendant with respect to the insurance accident of this case. We examine ex officio

B. In a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the relevant legal doctrine, the benefit of confirmation is recognized only when receiving a judgment of confirmation only is the most effective and appropriate means to eliminate the Plaintiff’s right or legal status’s unstable danger (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2015Da66397, Jul. 22, 2016). Barring special circumstances, seeking confirmation against a person who is not a party to a direct dispute ought to be confirmed, barring special circumstances, and thus, it does not have any particular effectiveness in removing the Plaintiff’s legal status’s anxiety. Thus, there is no legal benefit

(See Supreme Court Decision 91Da6757 delivered on July 23, 1991, etc.). Furthermore, determination as to whether an insurance contract is contrary to good morals and other social order under Article 103 of the Civil Act should be made conclusive between the insurer and the policyholder who is the party to the conclusion of the insurance contract. Even if the insurer acknowledged the relevant insurance contract as null and void in a lawsuit filed against the insured, such res judicata does not extend to the policyholder.

C. According to the health table, Gap evidence No. 1, the insurance contract of this case is acknowledged as being concluded between the defendant's wife B and the plaintiff on January 25, 2010 by designating the insured as the defendant. Thus, the plaintiff, the insurer, filed a lawsuit against B, the contractor of the insurance contract of this case, and whether there exists the obligation to pay the insurance money.