1. All of the plaintiff's main claims are dismissed.

2. Attached Form concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant A;

1. An entry in the list;

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On October 11, 2007, the pertinent Plaintiff of the parties as the insured on October 11, 2007, and attached Form A with Defendant A.

1. The insurer who entered in the list of insurance contracts (hereinafter “instant insurance contracts”) is the party to the instant insurance contract. Defendant A is the party to the instant insurance contract, and Defendant B is the mother of Defendant A and the insured under the instant insurance contract.

B. On April 26, 2008, Defendant B, who paid the occurrence of an insured incident and the amount of insurance proceeds, commenced hospitalized treatment for 24 days on a satchitis, on the ground that he/she had been hospitalized for 24 days on April 26, 2008, on the ground that he/she was hospitalized for 315 days in total, from October 25, 2015, on the ground that he/she had been hospitalized for 315 days on the ground that he/she had been hospitalized for 14 days on the satchitis, satise-gun, satchitis, satchitis, satise-gun, satchitis, satch

【Ground of recognition】 The fact that there has been no dispute, entry in Gap's 1, 4, 5, and 6 (including the case of additional number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Summary of the parties' arguments

A. In the first place of the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Defendants concluded the instant insurance contract with a view to repeated long-term hospitalization, and repeated long-term hospitalized treatment from insurance companies, including the Plaintiff, for the purpose of unlawfully acquiring high-amount insurance proceeds from the insurance companies including the Plaintiff, and Defendant C received hospital treatment for a long time and repeatedly due to symptoms capable of hospital treatment. The Defendants did not notify the fact that they were subscribed to other insurance contracts similar to the security at the time of entering into the instant insurance contract, and did not have financial capability to maintain multiple insurance contracts. Therefore, the Defendants should be deemed to have the purpose of unfairly acquiring insurance proceeds at the time of entering into the instant insurance

Therefore, the instant insurance contract is null and void in accordance with Article 103 of the Civil Act, and Defendant C is unjust enrichment to the Plaintiff.