1. The plaintiff's claims against the defendants are all dismissed.

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

1. Basic facts

A. Defendant Pump Co., Ltd (hereinafter “Defendant Co., Ltd.”) is an insurance agency engaging in the business of concluding insurance contracts on behalf of the Defendant Co., Ltd., and Defendant A is an insurance solicitor working at the Lone Star Branch of the Defendant Co., Ltd.

B. On November 28, 2014, the Plaintiff subscribed to Fuden Social Life Insurance Co., Ltd.’s “Fuden New 100 years old-old pension insurance” and “Ieman Life Insurance Co., Ltd.’s “T dividends VIP franchise type (basic type) insurance” (basic type).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff's assertion and judgment

A. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion 1) Defendant A deceivings the Plaintiff that he would attract a large number of investors even though he did not have the ability or intent to attract R&D investments for the Plaintiff, and the Plaintiff became insured. The Defendant A violated the Plaintiff’s duty to protect the customers by soliciting insurance products inappropriate for the Plaintiff in light of the Plaintiff’s investment purpose, financial status, experience in investment, etc., and breached the duty to explain by failing to specify and explain the specific content of insurance products at the time, the possibility of loss of principal, anticipated return on investment, etc.

3. Therefore, Defendant A and its employer are liable to compensate the Plaintiff for the damages caused by the Plaintiff due to Defendant A’s deception, the violation of the duty to protect the customers, and the violation of the duty to explain.

B. The written evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 3-1, and 2 of the evidence No. 3-2 are alone, Defendant A deceiving the Plaintiff that Defendant A would attract a large number of investors in return for purchasing insurance policies.

It is insufficient to recognize that an insurance solicitor or insurance agency violated the duty to protect or explain the customer borne by the insurance solicitor or insurance agency due to the solicitation of insurance inappropriate for the Plaintiff and the explanation of the important matters of the insurance contract, and otherwise, evidence to acknowledge it.