1. The plaintiff's appeal is 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 judgment of the court of first instance citing the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is reasonable and acceptable.

2. As to the assertion made by this court

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) confirmation of the invalidity of the instant insurance contract and the claim for the return of unjust enrichment (main assertion) 1) the Defendant concluded a short-term insurance contract even though it did not have any economic capacity to bear large amounts of insurance premiums at the time of entering into the instant insurance contract, and received excessive insurance proceeds from the Plaintiff and the insurance company including the Plaintiff after repeatedly hospitalized for the same or similar disease for a long time. Therefore, the instant insurance contract is null and void as a juristic act contrary to good morals and other social order. The Defendant is obligated to return the insurance proceeds received to the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment. 2) The Plaintiff’s ground for appeal on this part is alleged in the first instance trial.

However, according to the evidence adopted in the reasoning of the first instance judgment cited earlier, it is difficult to view that the Defendant was hospitalized due to the pretending insurance accident, or the degree of injury or disease, and rather, the Defendant was conducted an operation to treat the climatic signboard escape from the stage of hospitalization, the groundless typosis, and the normal activity inside the wall of the womb.

Considering such circumstances, the evidence alone presented cannot be deemed null and void as a juristic act contrary to good morals and other social order, as alleged by the Plaintiff, taking into account all the circumstances appropriately indicated in the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance.

The judgment of the first instance court to the same purport is correct.

Plaintiff

We do not accept the argument without further review.

B. 1 Plaintiff’s assertion of unjust enrichment return (preliminary assertion) corresponding to excessive hospitalization, even if the instant insurance contract is not invalidated, 204 days during the Defendant’s hospitalization.