1. The plaintiff's insurance money payment obligation based on the insurance contract stated in the attached Form against the defendants does not exist.

1. Basic facts

A. The deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”) was in the Army Staff on December 7, 1991, and was in the position of the deceased, from September 30, 201, to September 30, 2013, to the close support of the Drife Drife Drife Drife Drife Drife Drife Drife Drife Drife Drifer. The Defendant A’s spouse and the Defendant B’s children.

B. The headquarters of the Ministry of National Defense concluded a national love military insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) with the Plaintiff as the insured with the same content as the attached Form stating the Plaintiff as the insured.

C. On February 3, 2014, the Deceased died of his or her death at the so-called reading room in the military unit due to his or her unknown depth.

On December 30, 2016, the Defendants drafted a claim for insurance money with the content of claiming insurance money based on the instant insurance contract, and received the claim from the Plaintiff on January 2, 2017.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, 2, Eul evidence 1, 5, 7, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Article 662 of the former Commercial Act (amended by Act No. 12397, Mar. 11, 2014) applies the two-year extinctive prescription to the insurance claim. As such, the two-year extinctive prescription has expired since the date of the death of the deceased, who is the date of the occurrence of the insured event. 2) The Defendants’ claim against the Defendants could have known that the death of the deceased was caused by disease on February 21, 2017, which became final and conclusive in the judgment of revocation of the disposition to refuse to grant distinguished services to the State. Therefore, the extinctive prescription to the insurance claim from February 21, 2017 should run.

Therefore, the extinctive prescription of the right to claim insurance based on the insurance contract of this case has not been completed, or family affairs extinctive prescription was completed.

In light of the fact that a lawsuit was brought to clarify the cause of death of the deceased, it constitutes an abuse of rights to claim the completion of extinctive prescription.

B. Determination 1.