1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

1...

1. Basic facts

A. On March 30, 2012, the Defendant concluded an insurance contract with the Plaintiff engaging in non-life insurance business (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. On April 8, 2012, the Defendant hospitalized 568 days in 28 times from April 9, 2014 to November 23, 2014, including being hospitalized in a hospital for 11 days, and the Defendant paid the Defendant the insurance premium of KRW 7,020,000 in total over 11 times in accordance with the instant insurance contract.

C. Meanwhile, on March 27, 2012, immediately before the conclusion of the instant insurance contract, the Defendant concluded six insurance contracts, including Samsung Fire and one case, the future cryp fire and two cases on March 28, 2013, and the Mzz fire and two cases on March 29, 2012. After entering into the instant insurance contract, the Defendant concluded three insurance contracts, including Samsung Fire and one case on April 3, 2012, and one case on October 26, 2012, and one case on March 20, 2014, including Samsung Fire and one case on March 20, 2014.

[Reasons for Recognition] Each entry of Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 10 (including paper numbers), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The assertion and judgment

A. (1) The Plaintiff’s assertion that the Defendant concluded the instant insurance contract with a view to illegally acquiring insurance proceeds through multiple insurance contracts, and thus, the instant insurance contract is null and void in violation of good morals and other social order stipulated under Article 103 of the Civil Act.

Therefore, the defendant is obligated to return the insurance proceeds received from the plaintiff as unjust enrichment according to the insurance contract of this case.

(2) The Defendant’s assertion was actually treated by Ampha, and the duty of disclosure was also imposed at the time of entering into the instant insurance contract, and the Defendant did not enter into the instant insurance contract for the purpose of unjust acquisition of insurance proceeds.

B. (A) Where a policyholder concludes an insurance contract with a view to unjust acquisition of insurance proceeds through multiple insurance contracts, the insurance contract is null and void in violation of good morals and other social order under Article 103 of the Civil Act.

3.2