1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The grounds for the court’s explanation of the facts and the parties’ assertion are the same as the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, the pertinent part of the judgment of the court of first instance is cited in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Determination

A. An act of anti-social order null and void pursuant to Article 103 of the Civil Act not only goes against good morals and other social order, but also goes against social order, even though its content itself does not go against social order, it includes the case where the contents of rights and duties which are the object of a juristic act are legally enforced, or the juristic act becomes contrary to social order by being attached with conditions or monetary consideration, and where the motive of the juristic act known to the other party or the other party is contrary to social order, and where the policyholder concludes an insurance contract for the purpose of unfairly acquiring the insurance money through multiple insurance contracts, allowing the payment of the insurance money under the insurance contract concluded for this purpose not only would go beyond social reasonableness by encouraging the speculative spirit to gain unjust profits by abusing the insurance contract, but also would violate the purpose of the insurance system, destroying the risk of danger, and causing the sacrifice of many subscribers, and thus, such insurance contract shall be null and void in violation of good public morals and other social order stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Act.

On the other hand, even if there is no evidence to directly acknowledge whether a policyholder has concluded multiple insurance contracts for the purpose of illegally acquiring the insurance proceeds, such purpose may be ratified based on the overall circumstances, including the occupation and property status of the policyholder, the background leading to the conclusion of multiple insurance contracts, the scale of the insurance contracts and the circumstances after

Supreme Court Decision 200 delivered on July 28, 2005