1. All appeals on the principal lawsuit and counterclaim by the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be the principal lawsuit.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the basic facts is that the reasoning for the judgment of the court of first instance is the same as the statement “1. Recognizing facts”. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion was filed by the Defendant at B Hospital on March 27, 2013, which was before the conclusion of the instant insurance contract, and the Plaintiff breached the duty of disclosure by failing to notify the Plaintiff at the time of entering into the instant insurance contract, despite the fact that the Defendant was diagnosed as the class 1, 201, and was diagnosed as the class 63 of the No. 133, the Plaintiff did not have any duty of disclosure.

Upon entering into the instant insurance contract, the Defendant completely cured with respect to “the history of hospitalization and surgery,” and responded that there was no re-exploitation experience, but was found on June 5, 2013. However, the Defendant was also in violation of the duty of disclosure, since the self-exploitation type was not completely cured on October 1, 2009 without completely recovering from the treatment, and thus, the Defendant violated the duty of disclosure.

Even if there was no causal relationship between the above violation of the duty of disclosure and the insurance accident of this case, the plaintiff did not have a duty to pay insurance money for the following matters since the contract of this case was terminated due to the defendant's violation

B. At the time of entering into the instant insurance contract, the Defendant did not violate the duty of disclosure by intention or gross negligence, as the Defendant faithfully responded to the Plaintiff’s question.

The defendant given birth to D early, and the above D suffered from a disability, such as cerebral typhrosis, and received treatment from July 3, 2013 to November 14, 2013, by being hospitalized in a middle-patient's room and received treatment. After that, there was a subsequent occurrence of a disability. This constitutes an insurance accident stipulated in the insurance contract of this case, and thus, the defendant shall receive insurance proceeds in accordance with the basic contract of the insurance contract of this case and the payment criteria for insurance proceeds by each special agreement.

3. Determination.