1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. On May 29, 1998, the deceased B (the deceased on July 12, 2016, hereinafter “the deceased”) concluded a non-distribution green traffic accident insurance contract with the Defendant (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with the following content.

Insured beneficiary: In the case of death of the content of the Plaintiff’s coverage: 4,500,000 won per year in the event of death of a general accident other than a traffic accident: 4,500,000 won per year in the event of death of a traffic accident.

B. The Deceased committed suicide on July 12, 2016.

C. On August 1, 2016, the Plaintiff asserted that “the deceased’s suicide was a death due to a general accident” and sought insurance payment from the Defendant under the instant insurance contract, but the Defendant rejected payment.

[Grounds for Recognition] Unsatisfy, entry of Gap 1 to 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion argues that the suicide of the deceased constitutes a general disaster death guaranteeing the insurance contract of this case, and thus, the defendant should pay insurance proceeds.

According to the statement in Eul evidence No. 1, Article 12 of the Clause applicable to the insurance contract of this case (the insurance accident which does not pay the insurance money) provides that "the company may terminate this contract at the same time as not paying the insurance money or exempting the payment of the insurance premium when any of the following events occurs: 1. It is recognized that the insured intentionally injures himself/herself in the state of mental illness, but it does not cause any harm to himself/herself in the state of mental illness, and there is no evidence to acknowledge that the deceased was in the state of mental illness at the time of suicide, and therefore, the defendant is not liable to pay the insurance money in accordance with the insurance contract

The Plaintiff asserted that the terms and conditions submitted with Eul evidence No. 1 were not the terms and conditions at the time of the conclusion of the instant insurance contract.