1. According to the expansion of the purport of the counterclaim by this court, the judgment of the first instance is modified as follows.

1. The reasons why the court of the first instance should explain are as follows. Thus, the reasoning of the court of the first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment, except for the following cases, and it is citing it in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the

In addition to the provisions of the first instance judgment, the term “the closure of an internal investigation” in the 11st sentence is changed to “the closure of the first internal investigation (hereinafter “the first internal investigation”) on June 13, 2014, and the term “the closure of an internal investigation at multiple times” in the 1st sentence to “the closure of the second internal investigation (hereinafter “the second internal investigation”) on June 22, 2015,” respectively. The term “Appraiser” in the first instance judgment to “the first instance court appraiser” in the 9th sentence, 13th and 8th class were changed to “the first instance court appraiser.” From the 23th class to the same 10th class day. The Defendant is obligated to submit to the Plaintiff the above 66,198,400 won and delay damages for the insurance period, and to pay the Plaintiff the amount of the insurance money within the pertinent 4th class period for which the Plaintiff received the insurance money from the beneficiary of the first instance judgment was requested to pay the insurance money within the first instance judgment.