1. As to the accident that the network D died on January 2, 2018, the attached Form against the Defendant (Counterclaim Defendant) of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) is attached.

Basic Facts

On August 2, 2011, the Plaintiff entered into an insurance contract in the attached list (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with Defendant C.

The insurance contract of this case includes the payment of insurance money of KRW 90 million to a statutory inheritor when the deceased dies due to an injury within the insurance period. The terms and conditions stipulate that “if the insured intentionally causes the payment of insurance money to the insured has occurred due to a cause not to pay the insurance money, the insured shall pay the insurance money if he/she damages himself/herself in a state that he/she is unable to make a free decision due to a defect, etc.”

around 21:00 on January 2, 2018, the Deceased was administered on the 18th floor of Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, and died immediately thereafter.

(hereinafter, this case’s accident). The Defendants are legal successors of the Deceased.

[Based on the fact that there is no dispute, Gap's evidence Nos. 1 through 4 (including each number), and the plaintiff's assertion of the purport of the whole pleadings. The accident of this case constitutes "the case where the insured intentionally caused the insured's insurance accident" under Article 659 of the Commercial Act and Article 659 of the insurance contract of this case, which provides for the exemption from the duty to pay insurance money, and "the case where the insured intentionally caused the insured's damage in the state where he can make a free decision." Thus, the plaintiff asserts that in relation to the accident of this case, the legal heir of the deceased did not have the duty to pay the injury death insurance

As to this, the Defendants asserted that the instant accident constitutes “when the insured harms himself/herself in a state that he/she is unable to make a free decision due to mental illness,” and thus, the Plaintiff is liable to pay the insurance proceeds under the instant insurance contract to the Defendants, and seek payment of the insurance proceeds as a counterclaim

Judgment

Therefore, it is therefore.