The plaintiff's appeal, the claim against the defendant B extended by this court, and the defendants added by this court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited by the court of first instance is as follows, except for the determination of the conjunctive claims added by the plaintiff in this court, and thus, it is identical to the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it is acceptable to accept it as it is in accordance

2. The second side of the judgment of the court of first instance, the second side of the judgment of the court of first instance, from 13 to 17, shall be added to the following:

After the conclusion of the instant insurance contract, Defendant B received treatment from the Plaintiff due to disease, such as urine and cattoma, from the hospital on March 5, 2010, as stated in the attached Form No. 11 (Evidence A) and received from the Plaintiff, from that time, Defendant B received insurance proceeds of KRW 38,107,587, and Defendant C received insurance proceeds of KRW 63,651,78, total sum of KRW 25,54,191, and KRW 63,651,778, as of August 28, 2017.

The third ground of the judgment of the court of first instance shall be the second ground of the second second ground of the judgment "2010. 28." to "20. 8. 201. 8."

The evidence of the first instance court's first instance court's first instance judgment's first instance judgment's second instance judgment's "the first instance court's first instance judgment's first instance judgment's "the results of requesting the evaluation of medical records for the president of H Hospital".

Of the fifth instance judgment of the first instance court, “(6)” and “(4)”, the first instance court stated that the No. 1 of the medical record appraisal specialist of the H Hospital appears to be sufficient for the Defendant B’s high blood pressure and other cardio-cerebralcular diseases in the H Hospital as a pain treatment; and that the medical specialist of the hospital in the same hospital present the opinion that the 140-day period during the hospital treatment was not necessary for the hospital treatment on the ground that the Defendant B was not a severe high blood relative at the time of hospitalization, or that the Defendant B was taking advantage of the cardio-cerebral he was at the time of hospitalization during the hospital treatment.” The fifth instance judgment of the first instance added “461 days” of the fifth 16th judgment to “44 days.”

The details of the payment of the insurance money in attached Form 1 of the judgment of the first instance shall be replaced by the details of the payment of the insurance money in attached Form 1.

3. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. The plaintiff's assertion.