1. Each claim filed by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) is dismissed.

2. The plaintiff (Counterclaim defendant) is the plaintiff.

A principal lawsuit and a counterclaim shall be deemed simultaneously.

Basic Facts

As an insurer engaging in life insurance business, the Plaintiff concluded each variable social insurance contract with Defendant A and the attached table Nos. 1 through 12 as an insurer belonging to the Plaintiff, and each variable social insurance contract with Defendant B and the attached table Nos. 13 and 14 respectively.

After paying the premium, the Defendants suspended the payment of the premium, and received the cancellation refund or the early withdrawal.

The amount of premiums paid by the Defendants and the refund money for cancellation, and the amount of early withdrawal shall be as specified in the corresponding column of the attached Table.

[Grounds for recognition] The facts without dispute, Eul's statements in Eul evidence Nos. 1 through 14 (including serial numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the defendants asserted the purport of the whole pleadings, and the defendants asserted the purport of each of the insurance contracts of this case. The plaintiff violated the duty to explain terms and conditions and explain differently from the facts of the contract, such as main contract, insurance premium, payment period of insurance premium, insurance period, etc. two years after the conclusion of each of the contracts of this case, and thus each of the insurance contracts of this case is null and void. Thus, the plaintiff is primarily obligated to return the remainder after deducting the refund for cancellation, etc. returned from the insurance premium paid by the defendants to the defendants as unjust enrichment, and the plaintiff is obligated to compensate for damages equivalent to the above amount suffered by the defendants due to violation of the duty to specify terms and conditions

On the other hand, the plaintiff did not violate the duty to specify and explain the terms and conditions and sought confirmation of the absence of the obligation to return insurance premiums against the defendants.

Judgment

One insurer as to the violation of the duty to specify and explain the terms and conditions and the validity of each of the insurance contracts in this case is aware of, or common to, the policyholder in the transaction, so it is sufficiently anticipated even if there is no separate explanation.