1. Attached Form concluded between the Plaintiff and the Defendant

1. The entry of an insurance contract shall confirm its invalidity;

2. The defendant.

1. Basic facts

A. On January 8, 2009, the Plaintiff (the Plaintiff Co., Ltd., Ltd., the Plaintiff’s trade name before the change) had the Defendant as the beneficiary, the insured, as B, his/her father.

1. The instant insurance contract was concluded with respect to non-distribution LIG livelihood security insurance (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. B was hospitalized at a hospital for 29 days in total between September 7, 2009 and July 23, 2014, and was hospitalized at the hospital for 571 days. Under the insurance contract of this case, the Defendant, a beneficiary, was attached to the Plaintiff.

2. Insurance money was paid in total of 17,11,298 won as shown in the details of payment of insurance money;

C. The insurance contract that the defendant concluded with B as the insured is attached Form

3. In addition to the insurance proceeds received from the Plaintiff according to the instant insurance contract, the said insurance company received a total of KRW 301,135,168 according to each of the above insurance contracts from December 2009 to July 2014.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 through 4 (including additional number; hereinafter the same shall apply) and the purport of whole pleadings

2. Around the time of entering into the instant insurance contract claiming the Plaintiff, the Defendant entered into a multiple insurance contract whose coverage is similar to that of the instant insurance contract with another insurance company, paid excessive insurance premiums compared to its income. As seen earlier, the Defendant received a large amount of insurance proceeds from multiple insurance companies including the Plaintiff after repeatedly hospitalized for a long time, and received treatment.

In light of these circumstances, the instant insurance contract was concluded by the Defendant for the purpose of illegally acquiring insurance proceeds through multiple insurance contracts, and thus is null and void in violation of good morals and other social order stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Act, and thus, the Plaintiff’s unjust enrichment return of KRW 17,11,298, total insurance proceeds received to the Defendant.