2011AD 16625 Claim for the Return of Insurance Proceeds and Invalidity of the Insurance Contract

Dong Fire Insurance Co., Ltd.

A

December 14, 2011

January 11, 2012

1. It is confirmed that an insurance contract entered in the separate sheet signed by the Plaintiff and the Defendant on February 8, 2010 is invalid.

2. The defendant shall pay to the plaintiff 3,450,000 won with 20% interest per annum from October 30, 201 to the day of full payment.

3. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the defendant.

4. Paragraph 2 can be provisionally executed.

The same shall apply to the order.

1. Indication of claim;

A. The claim for nullification of the insurance contract

On February 8, 2010, the Plaintiff concluded an insurance contract with the Defendant listed in the separate sheet. The Defendant violated the duty of disclosure under the Commercial Act because it did not notify the Plaintiff of the fact that it concluded an insurance contract with another insurance company at the time of signing the insurance contract, or of its own disease, treatment, etc. From July 2009 to August 201, the Plaintiff concluded more than 10 insurance contracts with multiple insurance companies, including the instant insurance contract, with the content that guarantees daily allowances during the period of hospitalization, and subsequently wrongfully acquired insurance proceeds by receiving long-term hospitalized treatment from September 201 to November 201, including receiving KRW 74,980,656 in total as insurance proceeds. Accordingly, the instant insurance contract is null and void in violation of Article 103 of the Civil Act.

B. The claim for the return of insurance money

From February 8, 2010 to November 25, 2011, the Defendant paid the insurance premium of KRW 635,800,000. The Plaintiff paid the Defendant the insurance premium of KRW 4,619,000 in total with the daily hospitalization days from May 11, 2011 to November 9, 2011 under the instant insurance contract. The Defendant is obligated to return the difference to the Plaintiff KRW 3,983,200, which is a part of which is the difference, and the Defendant claims KRW 3,450,00,00.

2. Judgment by public notice (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act).

The presiding judge; the presiding judge

Judge Jeon Sung-sung

Judges Na commercialia

A person shall be appointed.