1. The part concerning the claim for nullification of the contract in this case shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's remaining claims are dismissed.

3...

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff concluded the instant No. 1 Insurance Contract and the instant No. 2 Insurance Contract according to the sequences as indicated in the separate sheet with the Defendant (hereinafter referred to as the “instant insurance contract”). In sum, the Plaintiff concluded each of the instant insurance contracts (hereinafter referred to as “instant insurance contracts”).

B. On January 24, 2009, the Defendant received KRW 3,000,000 of each insurance money from the Plaintiff under the instant first insurance contract on the ground that the Defendant had been paid KRW 3,000,000 from the Plaintiff on August 20, 201, on the ground that there was a negligent number of persons on the Jeju-si screen in accordance with the instant second insurance contract, and that on March 19, 201, the Defendant received KRW 3,00,000 from the Plaintiff pursuant to the instant second insurance contract.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 3 (including branch numbers, if any; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Although a lawsuit seeking confirmation of the legitimacy of a lawsuit seeking confirmation of a contract is permitted to eliminate risks or apprehensions relating to the present rights or legal status, even in the past legal relations, if it is affected by the present rights or legal status, and it is deemed that obtaining a judgment on confirmation of the legal relations is an effective and appropriate means to eliminate risks or apprehensions relating to the present rights or legal status, there is benefit in confirmation.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2010Da36407 Decided October 14, 2010, etc.). The facts that the instant insurance contract was terminated on July 17, 2012, which returned to the instant case, are no dispute between the parties. According to the overall purport of the statement and pleading in the evidence No. 2-4 and No. 3-1 of the evidence No. 2-1, the part relating to the number of neglected persons disputing the Plaintiff among the instant insurance contract No. 2-based ceases to have effect on April 18, 2014, and thus, whether each of the instant insurance contracts was invalidated before it is still the current right or law.