beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On January 5, 2001, the Defendant concluded the instant insurance contract between the Plaintiff and the Defendant as the contractor and the insured.
B. On June 26, 2004, the Defendant received KRW 2,400,000 from the Plaintiff based on the instant insurance contract, from that time, from that time, the Defendant received insurance proceeds of KRW 51,535,689 in total for 23 accidents, as stated in the details of receipt of attached Table 2 insurance proceeds, from September 3, 2013.
C. Meanwhile, between June 10, 1992 and May 19, 2004, the Defendant subscribed to 14 insurance as shown in the status of conclusion of the attached Table 3 insurance contracts. Under each insurance contract, the Defendant received insurance proceeds of KRW 233,664,275 in total as stated in each item of the insurance proceeds received in the same list.
[Reasons for Recognition] In the absence of dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 3, and 11 (including each number), each of the interesting fire and marine insurance companies, Samsung Life Insurance Co., Ltd., Samsung C&T Co., Ltd., Han C&C Co., Ltd., future life insurance Co., Ltd., and post office Finance Development Institute's fact-finding results, the result of each of the orders to submit financial transaction information to K&C Co., Ltd.,
2. The Defendant asserted that the Plaintiff had no particular income, and received a large amount of insurance money after concluding a multiple insurance contract with the Defendant as the insured with other insurance companies.
In light of the above, since the insurance contract of this case was concluded for the purpose of unfairly acquiring insurance money through multiple insurance contracts, it is null and void in violation of good morals and social order stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Act. The defendant shall return the insurance money received from the plaintiff under the insurance contract of this case null and void to the plaintiff as unjust enrichment.
3. Determination
A. The number of policyholders of the relevant legal doctrine.