1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. Basic facts

A. 1) The Plaintiff A entered into the instant insurance contract, etc.

As the deceased’s spouse, the Plaintiff B is the legal inheritor as the deceased’s child. 2) Nonparty D concluded an insurance contract with the following content (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with the Defendant on the deceased’s death as the beneficiary’s legal heir at the time of the death of the deceased.

Article 17 of the Framework Terms and Conditions of the Insurance Contract of this case provides that "where a cause for the payment of insurance money has occurred due to the insured's intentional act" shall be an exemption from the payment of insurance money: Provided, That "if the insured has damaged himself/herself under a condition that he/she cannot make a free decision due to mental disorder, etc., the insurance money shall be paid." (B) On October 13, 2013, the deceased discovered agrochemicals in his/her residence and transferred them to E hospital on the ground of the exemption from the exemption from the exemption from the exemption from the exemption from the exemption from the exemption from the exemption from the exemption from the exemption from the insurance money. (3) On September 18, 2013, the deceased: (1) around 18:30 of the accident of this case, he/she was discovered in his/her residence and transferred them to E hospital; and (4) died due to pesticide addiction on October 19, 2013 during the medical treatment.

(2) On November 4, 2013, the Defendant rejected the payment of insurance money on November 25, 2013 on the ground that the instant accident constitutes an intentional accident by the insured and does not constitute a ground for the payment of insurance money under the terms and conditions of the instant insurance contract, based on the fact that the deceased died due to depression. (c) The Plaintiff’s claim for the payment of insurance money was made on November 13, 2013.

2) After that, the Plaintiffs filed a claim for insurance proceeds with the Defendant again on March 9, 2016, but the Defendant again rejected the payment of the insurance proceeds.