1. It is confirmed that an insurance contract entered into between the Plaintiff and the Defendant is null and void.

2. The defendant shall be the plaintiff.

1. Indication of claim;

A. On July 13, 2010, the Plaintiff entered into an insurance contract with the Defendant as shown in attached Table 1 (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).

B. In around 2010, the Defendant concluded a majority of the guaranteed insurance contracts such as the instant insurance contracts with multiple insurance companies, and paid KRW 800,050 as monthly insurance premiums to the said insurance companies.

C. From July 19, 2010 to August 7, 2010, the Defendant began to be hospitalized at B Hospital on the ground of brain-proof, dyeed, tensions, etc., for a total of 955 days as shown in the attached Table 2, and was hospitalized until June 20, 2014. Under the instant insurance contract, the Defendant received KRW 94,983,440 from the Plaintiff as the insurance money for each of the above hospitalization.

In addition, the defendant received insurance money from other insurance companies on the same ground as the above Paragraph (c). The sum of the insurance money that the defendant received as such is KRW 254,586,683.

E. In light of the fact that it is difficult to view that the Defendant, at the time of entering into the instant insurance contract and the instant insurance contract with another insurance company, had an economic ability to bear an insurance premium equivalent to KRW 800,000 per month due to uncertainty of occupation and income at the time of entering into the insurance contract, and that the Defendant entered into the instant insurance contract with the aforementioned short-term coverage contract, and that the Defendant received large amount of insurance money after undergoing hospital treatment excessively compared to the degree of injury he/she suffered, the Defendant appears to have entered into the instant insurance contract for the purpose of unfairly acquiring the insurance money by pretending the insurance accident,

Therefore, the insurance contract of this case is null and void in violation of the good morals and social order stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Act, and the defendant continues to claim insurance money based on the insurance contract of this case.