1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation of this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added the judgment, which is identical to that of the judgment of the court of first instance, as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, as it is, except where the plaintiff asserts again in the court of

2. Additional determination

A. The summary of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) The Defendant B, an insurance solicitor of the Defendant Samsung Bio-resources, explained to the Plaintiff that “If the previous insurance premium was paid only for two years, several years thereafter, and even if the monthly substitute premium was paid in advance, it can be guaranteed that all the contents of the insurance are guaranteed even if the monthly substitute premium was paid in advance.” The Defendant B, an insurance solicitor of the Defendant Samsung Bio-resources, explained that the insurance contract of this case already concluded on July 23, 2010 and the insurance contract of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of which the contents of its guarantee are entirely identical to the insurance contract of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of this case of deception against the Plaintiff.”

3) In addition, Defendant B did not issue the terms and conditions of each of the instant insurance contracts to the Plaintiff at the time of the conclusion of each of the instant insurance contracts, and did not explain the key contents of each of the instant insurance contracts to the Plaintiff. 4) The Plaintiff suffered damages from Defendant B’s deception as above and the violation of the duty to deliver terms and conditions and the duty to explain clearly as an insurance solicitor, with the exception of KRW 11,182,273,818, excluding KRW 186,273,818, excluding KRW 111,282, as the cancellation refund.

5. Accordingly, Defendant B is a tort, and Defendant Samsung Bio-resources is jointly liable for damages by an insurance company under Article 102 of the Insurance Business Act, and such damages are inflicted on the Plaintiff.