1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On July 9, 2012, the deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”) entered the company D (hereinafter “D”) and served as the deputy head of the electrical design team of the said company. The Plaintiff A was the deceased’s wife, and the Plaintiff B was the deceased’s child.

The name of insurance product: D's policyholder of Flusmer organization insurance: Beneficiary of Death Insurance Contract, who is an employee of D: the amount of insurance coverage by the insured's statutory heir: the insurance period of KRW 200 million death: From April 29, 2015 to April 29, 2017

D Around April 29, 2015, around April 29, 2015, the following insurance contracts were concluded with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant insurance contracts”).

Article 5 (Grounds for Not Payment of Insurance Money) (1) A company shall not pay insurance money when any of the following causes for the payment of insurance money occurs:

1. The insured has intentionally impaired himself/herself: Provided, That he/she shall be paid insurance proceeds if the insured has impaired himself/herself under the condition that he/she is unable to make a free decision due to mental disorder

C. Of the general terms and conditions of the above insurance contract, the main contents pertaining to this case are as follows:

At around 16:00 on July 19, 2015, the Deceased died on his own neck by using his string strings on the 5th floor of Jongno-gu Seoul E-building D emergency stairs railing.

(hereinafter “instant accident”). E.

After this, the plaintiffs filed a claim against the defendant for the payment of the insurance money under the insurance contract of this case, but the defendant rejected the payment of the insurance money on the ground that the accident of this case was caused by the deceased's intentional act and constitutes reasons for

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there is no dispute, Gap, 1, 3, 4, 6, 7, 8, 11 through 15, 18, Eul, 1, 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The gist of the plaintiffs' assertion was that the deceased could not make a free decision due to extreme occupational stress, etc., resulting in an accident of this case by contingency, which is the insurance contract of this case.