1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The Plaintiff concluded each of the following variable social insurance contracts (hereinafter referred to as “instant insurance contract”) through B, an insurance solicitor belonging to the Defendant, and subsequently terminated each of the above insurance contracts.

After its subscription, the Plaintiff paid a total of KRW 84,574,80 as insurance premium from January 2016. At the following termination dates, the Plaintiff terminated the instant insurance contract and received KRW 71,155,481 on a total of KRW 71,481. The amount of KRW 71,55,481 on July 30, 2006, 30,000, 34,500,50, 757 Dless Dividend 39,60, 600, 60, 620, 60, 308, 184, 205, 208, 205, 184, 205, 205, 205, 360, 184, 205, 208, 208, 360,60, 600, 208, 2016.

2. At the time of entering into the instant insurance contract by the Plaintiff’s assertion, the insurance solicitor deceivings the Plaintiff, and violated the duty to explain and the suitability principle, etc., the Defendant is liable for compensating the Plaintiff as the employer and the truster of the insurance sales.

3. Determination

A. It is difficult to recognize that the Plaintiff deceptioned the Plaintiff on the ground that the evidence submitted by the Plaintiff on whether there was a deceptive act alone, stating that “if the Plaintiff entered into the instant insurance contract, profit will accrue up to eight times the ordinary deposit and three times the real estate.” There is no evidence to acknowledge otherwise.

Rather, as seen earlier, B explained to the Plaintiff, at the time of the conclusion of the instant insurance contract, important matters, including the maturity, early termination refund, and refund rate, as stipulated in the terms and conditions.