1. The Defendant is indicated in the separate sheet concluded on December 7, 2015 between the Defendant and the KRB life insurance company.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. D married with B and born the Plaintiff, and divorced from B on September 3, 2012.

At the time of divorce, D was designated as the Plaintiff’s person with parental authority, and on October 30, 2014, the Plaintiff’s person with parental authority changed to B.

B. D died on June 9, 2015, and D’s death benefit was paid to the Plaintiff, who is the heir of D.

C. B requested the Defendant, who is the Plaintiff’s mother, to conclude an insurance contract under the name of the Defendant. On December 7, 2015, the insurance contract entered into with the Defendant as the policyholder, the insured, and the beneficiary (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”). The insurance premium was paid in KRW 40 million with the amount of the said death insurance premium received by the Plaintiff as a lump sum.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap 1-3 evidence, Eul 2 evidence, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant insurance contract was purchased by lending the name of the Defendant for the purpose of using it for future school expenses, and requested the Defendant to change the name of the policyholder and the insured to the Plaintiff in the future on February 18, 2016, the Defendant is obligated to implement the procedure for change of name.

3. In full view of the evidence mentioned above, the witness E’s testimony, and the purport of the entire pleadings, the following circumstances are revealed.

① When the Plaintiff received the death insurance amount, B, who is a person with parental authority, consulted the insurance solicitor E with a view to using it as the Plaintiff’s future school expenses.

② Upon the recommendation of E, B entered into the instant insurance contract, and the name of E was to be the defendant, and E entered into the instant insurance contract upon finding the defendant.

③ No premiums, etc. borne by the Defendant while entering into the instant insurance contract are available.

In light of these circumstances, the insurance contract of this case seems to have been subscribed as the death benefit owned by the plaintiff by lending the name of the defendant.

The defendant, before D's birth, is the plaintiff.