1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

Purport of claim and appeal

purport.

1. The fact-finding and decision of the first instance court are justified even if the evidence submitted in the first instance court for the acceptance of the judgment of the first instance is based on the evidence submitted to this court.

Therefore, the reasoning for this Court regarding this case is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except for the addition or modification as follows, with the exception of the addition or modification as to “2. added or corrected.” As such, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

(4) If the Plaintiff violated the duty of disclosure on the ground that the Plaintiff entered into a contract with another insurance company at the time of entering into the insurance contract of this case, “In spite of the fact that the Defendant entered into an insurance contract with the other insurance company at the time of entering into the contract of this case,” it cannot be concluded that the insurance contract of this case was null and void as it constitutes a juristic act contrary to good morals and other social order and thus constitutes a juristic act contrary to the duty of disclosure. However, it is difficult to deem that the contract of this case was null and void on the sole basis of the following: (a) the need for hospitalization is not uniformly determined depending on the type of disease; (b) the patient’s health condition at the time of entering into the contract of this case; and (c) the patient’s health condition and medical treatment cannot be determined differently from the patient’s medical treatment.