1. As to the Defendant’s medical treatment “raculation”, the Plaintiff’s attached list against the Defendant.

On July 11, 2003, the Defendant concluded an insurance contract with the Plaintiff, an insurance company, including the special agreement to guarantee specific diseases of nine diseases, including urine diseases.

However, it is clear that the Defendant’s diagnosis of “caturology” (the disease classification code H36) does not fall under “cathoology E10 through E14” (the disease classification code E10 through E14), one of the nine diseases stipulated in the above insurance contract, and it does not fall under “the operation performed for the purpose of directly treating urine diseases” as stipulated in the above insurance contract, rather than directly treating urine diseases.

Therefore, even if the Defendant received racer’s opic treatment, the Plaintiff does not bear the obligation to pay insurance money, such as surgery allowances, to the Defendant, as long as it is not for the direct treatment of urcheric disease.

In addition, according to Article 13(2) and Article 12(3) of the Terms and Conditions of the Special Agreement on the Guarantee of Specific Diseases in the above insurance contract, the above insurance contract provides that "the insurance contract provides that "if the insured during the insurance period is diagnosed and finalized as nine diseases after the date the liability commences, and he/she undergoes "the operation accompanied by hospitalization" for the purpose of directly treating the nine diseases, he/she shall be paid nine diseases." However, there is no evidence to acknowledge that the Defendant had undergone "the operation accompanied by hospitalization" as of July 20, 2010 for which he/she seeks the payment of the surgery benefits.

On the other hand, even if the plaintiff paid the defendant the rasher's surgery benefits to the defendant several times in the past, such circumstance alone alone that the defendant who received the procedure for the rasher's opic surgery that does not have the plaintiff's obligation to pay insurance proceeds under the above insurance contract will not be paid benefits due to the above surgery.