1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. Basic facts

A. On February 27, 2006, the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) concluded a non-dividend variable pension insurance contract between the Plaintiff and the beneficiary B at the maturity of the Plaintiff and the beneficiary B (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. The Deceased paid a total of KRW 89,340,000 in total over 30 times from February 2, 2006 to July 2008, the Deceased, based on the instant insurance contract.

C. The Deceased received from the Defendant a total of KRW 52,90,000 on June 8, 2006, a sum of KRW 26,066,035,035 (=52,90,000 on November 15, 2006, and KRW 52,990,000 on November 19, 2007, and KRW 26,06,035 on July 25, 2008, the Deceased received KRW 79,056,035,000 on the ground of the instant insurance contract (i.e., KRW 52,90,000 on June 26, 2006).

The Deceased died on April 26, 2009, and the designated parties, including the Plaintiff, are children of the Deceased.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 4 through 7, Eul evidence 5, 8 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion that each of the insurance contracts of this case is an insurance accident against the death of another person, but did not explain important matters concerning the fact of concluding the contract to the plaintiff as the insured at the time of concluding the insurance contract, and as it was null and void since it was concluded without the plaintiff's consent, the defendant asserts that the defendant is liable to pay the insurance premium paid based on unjust enrichment, recruitment allowance, payment reserve of death insurance money,

3. Determination

A. In entering into each of the instant insurance contracts, an insurance solicitor has a duty to explain whether or not there is a duty to the insured to the insured so that the insured can satisfy the contractual requirements. However, the insurance contract does not appear to have a duty to explain directly to the insured, but violates the duty to explain.