1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's primary claims and additional claims expanded by this court.

1. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows. The reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance cited in the following sub-paragraph (2) and the ground of the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance, except where the plaintiff added the judgment of the conjunctive claim added

2. The second part of the judgment of the court of first instance, "2. Plaintiff's assertion and judgment" in the second part of the judgment of the court of first instance No. 10, shall be applied to "2. Judgment on the Plaintiff's primary claim."

The reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the second-party.

this subsection shall be filled by the following:

A. The insurance contract of the Plaintiff’s assertion is null and void as it is a juristic act contrary to good morals and other social order as stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Act. The Defendant shall return to the Plaintiff the amount of unjust enrichment equivalent to the insurance money paid under the above insurance contract, the amount of KRW 92,511,727, and the damages for delay. The ground of the first instance judgment 2

(2)No. (2) shall do so in the following manner:

No. 2 of the judgment of the first instance court, i.e., the Defendant’s assertion that the instant insurance contract was invalid by asserting that the Defendant had received false or excessive hospitalization, but the Defendant cannot be deemed to have received false or excessive hospitalization, as follows. Whether the Defendant was basically engaged in false or excessive hospitalization in individual hospitalization or not is a separate issue as to whether the instant insurance contract was invalid or not.

(3)Paragraphs (3) and (3) shall be filled with as follows:

“(3) Therefore, this case’s insurance contract cannot be deemed null and void as a juristic act contrary to good morals and other social order provided by Article 103 of the Civil Act. Thus, the Plaintiff’s primary claim is without merit.”

3. Judgment on the plaintiff's conjunctive claim

A. Even if the Plaintiff’s assertion that the insurance contract of this case is not invalid, the Defendant received false or excessive hospitalization treatment from the Plaintiff and attached Form A.