1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

The purport of the claim and appeal is the purport of the appeal.

1. The reasons for the acceptance of the judgment of the court of first instance are as follows, except for the Plaintiff’s assertion added in the trial, and therefore, it is consistent with the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion

A. The summary of the argument is that the deceased's failure to make a free decision due to the state of the mental disorder due to the condition of the mental disorder, etc., constitutes an exception to the exemption from the payment of insurance money under the insurance contract of this case, and thus, constitutes an exception to the exemption from the payment of insurance money.

B. In principle, the insured’s suicide constitutes grounds for exemption, unless it does not constitute a case where the result of death was caused in a situation where the insured could not make a free decision due to mental illness, etc.

The issue of whether a person was killed in a situation that is unable to make a free decision due to mental illness, etc. should be determined by comprehensively taking into account the age and character of the person who committed the suicide, the physical and mental psychological status of the person who committed the suicide, the time and degree of the occurrence of the mental illness, the specific situation at the time of the occurrence of the mental illness, the surrounding situation where the person was faced with the suicide, the behavior of the person who committed the suicide at the time of the suicide, the time and place of the act of suicide, the motive, details

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da97772 Decided April 28, 201). As a result of the order issued by the National Health Insurance Corporation to submit documents to the National Health Insurance Corporation (see Supreme Court Decision 2009Da9772, Apr. 28, 201), it is insufficient to recognize

According to Gap evidence Nos. 23 to 31, 2016, when the deceased died, the deceased’s male-gu or her mother was influenced four times from Apr. 20, 2016 to Apr. 23:26 to May 23:5, 2016, and the deceased appeared to be under the influence of alcohol, and the deceased expressed complaints and objections to the male-gu and her mother.