1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Defendant B shall pay to the Plaintiff KRW 70,000,000 as well as to the Plaintiff on April 2014.

1. Basic facts

A. On July 19, 2013, C entered into a non-dividend smart integrated insurance contract (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”) containing the content that the insured is C, the beneficiary of the death insurance proceeds is the Plaintiff and the due date, and that if C dies due to a traffic accident, it is paid KRW 90 million in total.

B. C, around November 29, 2013, around 08:45, on November 29, 2013, 08:45, on board and driving a motor vehicle under the Namyang-ro, the ebbbbbban Eup in the eb

(hereinafter referred to as “the deceased”). The above accident constitutes a traffic accident eligible for insurance proceeds under the insurance contract of this case.

C. On January 13, 2014, the Plaintiff and D, the inheritor of the Deceased, reported the inheritance limited acceptance by the Daejeon Family Court as the Seosan Branch of the Daejeon Family Court 2014Ra13, and the said report on the qualified acceptance was accepted on February 12, 2014.

On the other hand, on December 16, 2013, Defendant B, the creditor of the deceased, obtained the execution clause for succession to the Plaintiff and D, the inheritor, with respect to the promissory note No. 565 of the No. 565 of the No. 565 of the No. 1900, a notary public on December 16, 2013, which was the creditor of the deceased, as the defendant company, and the debtor and the third debtor were the defendant as the defendant under Seoul Southern Southern District Court No. 2013TTT25962 on December 26, 2013, the plaintiff received the seizure and collection order against KRW 70,000 among the claim for death insurance money in relation to the insurance contract of this case from the defendant company, and the above seizure and collection order was served on the defendant company on December 31, 2013.

E. On January 20, 2014, the Plaintiff claimed KRW 90,000,000 of the instant insurance proceeds to the Defendant Company. However, on February 13, 2014, the Defendant Company paid only KRW 20,000,000, excluding the above KRW 70,000,000, which was seized among the insurance proceeds, on the ground that the Defendant Company served with the order of seizure and collection.

F. On February 17, 2014, the Plaintiff seized the above claim.