1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

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

1. On December 14, 2007, under the premise, ① the Green Damage Insurance Co., Ltd. and the Defendant concluded the instant insurance contract with the Defendant as the insured on December 14, 2007, with the content of ensuring the cost of injury hospitalization, KRW 20,000 per day, and KRW 30,00 per day, etc. (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”). The Plaintiff subscribed to the instant insurance contract.

② From June 15, 2008 to October 10, 2014, the Defendant hospitalized 408 days in total and claimed insurance money to the Plaintiff. The Plaintiff paid KRW 53,670,000 in total due to the daily amount of hospitalization.

[Ground of recognition] Unsatisfy, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, and 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the instant insurance contract was concluded by the Defendant for the purpose of unfairly acquiring insurance proceeds through multiple insurance contracts is null and void as acts contrary to good morals and social order stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Act. The Defendant is obligated to return the insurance proceeds received from the Plaintiff as unjust enrichment.

3. Determination

A. Where a policyholder concludes an insurance contract for the purpose of unjust acquisition of insurance money through a large number of insurance contracts, the payment of insurance money under an insurance contract concluded for this purpose would be in deviation from social reasonableness by encouraging speculative spirit to gain unjust profits by abusing the insurance contract, and also would undermine the purpose of the insurance system, such as reasonable diversification of risks, destroying the contingentness of risks, and causing the sacrifice of the large number of subscribers, thereby impairing the foundation of the insurance system. Thus, such insurance contract is null and void against good morals and other social order under Article 103 of the Civil Act.

On the other hand, it is directly recognized whether a policyholder has concluded multiple insurance contracts for the purpose of illegally acquiring the insurance proceeds.