The judgment below

The part against the plaintiff is reversed, and that part of the case is remanded to the Seoul High Court.

The defendants are the defendants.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

1. As to the Defendants’ grounds of appeal

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 such purpose would be in deviation from social reasonableness by encouraging speculative spirit to gain unjust profits by abusing the insurance contract. Moreover, the purpose of the insurance system, such as reasonable diversification of risks, destroying the contingencyness of risks, and causing the sacrifice of the large number of subscribers, thereby impairing the foundation of the insurance system. Such an insurance contract is null and void against good morals and other social order under Article 103 of the Civil Act.

(See Supreme Court Decision 9Da49064 delivered on February 11, 2000, Supreme Court Decision 2005Da23858 delivered on July 28, 2005, etc.) B.

The lower court, citing the reasoning of the first instance judgment or based on its adopted evidence, acknowledged the following facts and circumstances. In light of such circumstances as the deceased’s occupation and property status, the time and developments of concluding a majority insurance contract, the size and nature of the insurance contract, and circumstances after concluding the insurance contract, etc., the lower court determined that the second insurance contract of this case was null and void against good morals and other social order stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Act, on the ground that it can be ratified that the deceased entered into the second insurance contract of this case for the purpose of illegally acquiring

1) The Deceased appears to be a clerical error on February 10, 2012 ( February 17, 2012).

In this case, the plaintiff and the second insurance contract of this case were concluded. At this time, the insurance solicitor first expressed his intention to buy insurance and stated that it is not necessary to do any other insurance or special agreement than the death of injury. On the same day, the same company, Dongbu Fire Marine Insurance and the third insurance contract of this case were concluded.