1. Defendant B’s KRW 65,750,000 and its amount shall be five percent per annum from April 20, 2018 to November 15, 2018, and five percent per annum from November 20, 2018 to the Plaintiff.

1. Claim against the defendant B

A. Defendant B, as if he sells the normal insurance products of Defendant C Co., Ltd. (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”), deceivings the Plaintiff and deceivings the Plaintiff a total of KRW 349,100,00 from the Plaintiff as an insurance premium, thereby Defendant B is liable to compensate the Plaintiff for damages equivalent to the above money obtained by deception.

Thus, since Defendant B paid KRW 283,350,00 to the Plaintiff as profits, it is obligated to pay KRW 65,750,000 as damages suffered by the Plaintiff and damages for delay to the Plaintiff.

(b) Applicable provisions of Acts: Judgment made by deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);

C. Partial dismissal: The statutory interest rate under Article 3(1) main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings (hereinafter “Promotion Act”) was promulgated on May 21, 2019 and enforced from June 1, 2019, and the statutory interest rate under the Promotion Act was 12% per annum from June 1, 2019, the portion claimed in excess of the statutory interest rate is dismissed.

2. Claim against the defendant company

A. 1) The plaintiff's assertion 1 as to the primary claim is that the defendant B is a commercial employee of the defendant company and has the authority to enter into an insurance contract on behalf of the defendant company on behalf of the defendant company, and even if not, the plaintiff has justifiable grounds to believe that the defendant B has the authority to enter into an insurance contract on behalf of the defendant company, and thus, the insurance contract was effective between the plaintiff and the defendant company. Since the above insurance contract is caused by the defendant B's fraud, the plaintiff's delivery of the complaint in this case is revoked or terminated, the plaintiff's claim for the return of the amount paid according to the above insurance contract is made. 2) The evidence of the plaintiff's presentation of the suit in this case can only establish the fact that the monetary transaction between the plaintiff and the defendant was erroneous, and the defendant