1. The part against the defendant among the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the plaintiff's claim corresponding to the revoked part is revoked.

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff, a company running the insurance business, concluded an insurance contract for lost medical expenses (hereinafter “each of the instant insurance contracts”) with the content that the amount of the medical expenses would be paid in the event that the insured was hospitalized in the sick’s hospital and received treatment as the insured for each of the insured as C, D, E, F, G, and H (hereinafter “C, etc.”).

B. The defendant is a doctor who opened and is in operation a "Janwon" in Busanjin-gu I.

C. C, etc. was hospitalized in the Kanbu in 2017, and received treatment expenses from the Defendant for the purpose of treating in the white paper from the Defendant (hereinafter “the instant surgery”). Among them, C,760,00 won for the purchase and inspection expenses of the multi-point artificial insemination and the Plaintiff filed a claim for insurance proceeds under each insurance contract of this case with respect to the Plaintiff, and paid KRW 3,760,00 for C, 3748,266 for E, 3,748,266 for E, and KRW 2,343,96 for G, and KRW 3,760,00 for the purpose of treating in the white paper.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 6 (including each number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. When the price for the multi-point artificial insemination, which was subject to the guarantee of the indemnity insurance for lost medical expenses, was previously excluded from the subject of guarantee by amending the terms and conditions of the insurer, the Defendant issued to C, etc. a false receipt of medical expenses with a content that reduces the price for the multi-point artificial insemination and increases the inspection items remaining subject to the guarantee of the indemnity insurance for lost medical expenses, instead, issued C, etc. a false receipt of medical expenses with a content that aids and abets C, etc., or could actually receive compensation for the multi-point artificial insemination which was not directly compensated, and thus

3. In light of the following facts and circumstances, we examine the judgment, the facts acknowledged earlier, and the purport of the entire arguments, which can be acknowledged by adding to the above facts and the whole purport of the arguments, the evidence and arguments submitted by the Plaintiff.