1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The Plaintiff asserted that the insurance contract concluded with the Defendant was terminated by the Defendant’s breach of contract, and sought payment of KRW 10,365,265 of the cancellation refund and its delay damages against the Defendant.

We examine this.

On May 26, 200, the Plaintiff entered into a comprehensive health insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with the Defendant without dispute between the parties. According to the Plaintiff’s evidence Nos. 1 through 3, 1, 2, and 2 (including paper numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), as of April 22, 201, B entered into a loan contract with the Defendant as the Plaintiff’s agent, and was transferred KRW 9,000,000 to the account in the name of B from the Defendant on the same day. On May 14, 2012, the Plaintiff terminated the instant insurance contract and transferred KRW 1,365,264 to the account in the name of B from the Defendant, and the Plaintiff was not at the time of termination of the instant loan contract and the instant insurance contract, and thereafter, the Plaintiff was found to have not been divorced from the Busan Family Court on September 24, 2012 to have received the said judgment from the Busan Family Court on May 24, 2012.

In addition, the fact that the Defendant, at the request of the Plaintiff, paid the above loan and the refund money for cancellation to B without obtaining confirmation, was served on the Defendant on March 10, 2015, which included the Plaintiff’s declaration of intent to cancel the instant insurance contract, on the ground that it violated the instant insurance contract by paying the said loan and refund money for cancellation.

In regard to this, the defendant's conclusion of the above loan contract on behalf of the plaintiff Eul and the termination of the insurance contract of this case are valid since it was made within the legitimate authority. Accordingly, even if the defendant paid the above loan and the refund money for cancellation to the plaintiff Eul, it is not authorized to receive it from the plaintiff B or it is not so, the defendant's claim under Article 470