1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Defendant.

Purport of claim and appeal

1..

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows, and the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition of the written judgment of the court of first instance as follows. Thus, this is accepted by the main sentence of

(However, the above appeal was dismissed on August 16, 2019, even though Defendant C and D appealed appealed appealed filed an appeal with the Supreme Court Decision 2019Do8949, on the following page 6 of the judgment of the court of first instance: (a) the above appeal was dismissed on August 16, 2019; (b) the insurance contract was concluded in preparation for the occurrence of damages even though an ordinary individual or organization made efforts to prevent damages that may occur in advance; (c) the “indeterminatedity” of the accident as the contingency of the insurance accident is recognized as an assessment of the party’s subjective perception or objective situation; and (d) it does not necessarily deny it. According to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, it is difficult to view that the following additional contents were likely to occur in the following manner: (a) the insurance contract was concluded with the intention of 200 square meters, including the intention of 16th page 12 of the judgment of the court of first instance; (b) it is difficult to view that there was a possibility that there was an intentional intention or intention of 2070th of death.

On the last day of the 17th judgment of the first instance, the Defendant GG Mutual-Aid Association added the following contents to the last day of the 17th judgment, and thus, the intentional act does not constitute the area secured in the instant mutual-aid contract, thereby resulting in C’s intentional abuse.