1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Purport of claim and appeal

The first instance court.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, except for the rejection or addition of the judgment of the court of first instance, and therefore, it is identical to the part concerning the reason of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act

Part 6 and 7 of the first instance court's decision states "Evidence Nos. 9-2, 3, and 1 and 2 of the first instance court's judgment (including the number of pages 9-2, 3, and 1 and 2 of the second instance court's judgment); the result of this court's inquiry and reply to the fact-finding with respect to the Daejeon District Headquarters of the National Health Insurance Corporation of the Republic of Korea; and the result of the first instance court's inquiry with respect to the Daejeon Regional Headquarters of the National Health Insurance Corporation of the first instance court."

Part 5 of the judgment of the first instance court is "B. Determination as to the invalidity of the insurance contract of this case" in Part 3 of the judgment of the fifth instance.

The "use" of the 7th judgment of the first instance court shall be changed to "use" of the 11th judgment.

Part 4 of the judgment of the court of first instance is "This part of the claim" in Part 9 of the judgment of the court of first instance.

Part 5 of the judgment of the court of first instance is "(C) to determine the claim for return of unjust enrichment due to unnecessary hospitalization".

On the 9th judgment of the first instance court, the phrase “the result of the request for the appraisal of medical records to the Korean Compensation Medical Council of this court” in the 18th and 19th judgment, “the result of the request for the appraisal of medical records to the Korean Compensation Medical Council of this court,” is deemed to read “the result of the request for the appraisal of medical records to the Korean Compensation Medical Council of the first instance court,” respectively.

On the 10th of the first instance judgment, the "fact that the defendant presented his opinion" was added, and the "in the case of the non-existenceal urology pathology such as the defendant, the annual average days of hospitalization per patient should be much more than 26 days per annum."

From 10th to 11th of the judgment of the first instance court, the 7th of the 10th to 5th of the 11th of the judgment is as follows.

[3] However, only.]