1. The plaintiff's appeal is all dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's primary claim against the defendant A added by this court.

1. Judgment as to the main claim

A. The reasoning for this part of the judgment of the court of first instance is as follows, and this part of the judgment is cited by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for any further determination as follows.

B. The Plaintiff, in collaboration with Defendant A, sought a return of the insurance proceeds received as unjust enrichment, 48,453,780 won, and interest for delay in arrears.

However, as seen earlier, it is difficult to see the insurance contract of this case as null and void, and the plaintiff's above assertion is without merit.

2. Judgment on the conjunctive claim

A. Determination 1 on the claim for termination of the instant insurance contract constitutes a continuous contract based on trust relationship between the insurer that accepts the insurance and the policyholder. Although Defendant B did not need hospitalization, the relationship between the parties, which forms the basis for the existence of the instant insurance contract, by receiving a large amount of insurance money from the Plaintiff, was destroyed by being hospitalized for a long time in the absence of the need for hospitalization. Therefore, the instant insurance contract was lawfully terminated, and thus its confirmation was sought. 2) In particular, the circumstances mentioned above, as seen earlier, and the reasoning of the first instance judgment cited in accordance with the main sentence of

B. 2) Comprehensively taking account of paragraph (e)(e) (No. 8-3-20) of the same Article, it is difficult to readily conclude that Defendant B was suffering from a disease or an unnecessary long-term hospitalized treatment due to iceing the disease. The evidence submitted alone is difficult to deem that the trust relationship between the Plaintiff and the Defendants, which served as the basis of the instant insurance contract, has been destroyed to the extent that it is difficult to maintain the contractual relationship as it is, and there is no other evidence to acknowledge it. Therefore, the Plaintiff’s assertion is difficult to accept. (b) The Plaintiff’s assertion also does not nullify the instant insurance contract,