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. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the addition of the following "2. Additional Judgment" to the assertion that the defendant adds to the court of first instance, and thus, they are quoted in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Further determination "A. The defendant asserts that the insurance accident in this case occurred not by the insured but by the other party's negligence. Thus, since the violation of the duty of disclosure on Otoba did not affect the occurrence of the insurance accident in this case, the plaintiff is responsible for paying insurance proceeds to the defendant pursuant to the proviso to Article 655 of the Commercial Act. In the case of violation of the duty of disclosure of important matters in the conclusion of the insurance contract, it is proved that the violation of the duty of disclosure was not affected by the occurrence of the insurance accident in this case, i.e., the policyholder cannot terminate the insurance contract due to the above misrepresentation of the insurance accident in accordance with the proviso to Article 655 of the Commercial Act, but the burden of proving that there was no causation between the occurrence of the insurance accident in this case and the non-existence of the occurrence of the insurance accident in this case is on the part of the policyholder. Thus, if there is room for directly identifying the existence of the causal relation, the above proviso should not be applied to C&A of this case's accident in this case.

Therefore, the defendant's violation of duty of disclosure and "the harm from injury, etc. caused by injury" occurred in the insurance accident of this case.