beta
Text
1. The part concerning the conjunctive claim in the judgment of the court of first instance is revoked, and the revocation part is applicable.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On July 29, 2009, the Plaintiff and the Defendant concluded an insurance contract with the same content as the attached Form (hereinafter “instant insurance contract”).
B. From January 5, 2006 to May 31, 2018, the insurance contracts normally maintained among the insurance contracts concluded between the Defendant and several insurance companies including the Plaintiff and the Defendant as the insured are as listed below:
CD 1 CD 206. 21 December 21, 2006. 45,004 won 2 E non-dividend 2 E non-dividend 54,190 won on March 30, 209. 7. 52,110 won on August 29, 2015. 60,000 5 I non-dividend 50,000 won on May 29, 2015. 60, 30. 63, 6. 8. 10, 208, 6. 251, 250 won on June 10, 2013, 208, 7. 8, 200, 250 won on non-dividend 20, 7. 9, 200, 7. 8, 19, 200 won on June 18, 2014.
C. The Defendant was hospitalized for 32 days from October 6, 2009 to November 6, 2009, as well as for 257 days from around 2009 to around 2018, and was hospitalized for 20 days from around 2009 to KRW 13,99,616 in total from the Plaintiff according to the instant insurance contract.
[Ground of recognition] The non-contentious facts, Gap evidence 2, 4, and 16 (if there are serial numbers, including branch numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), the result of response to each order to submit financial transaction information to T institutions in the first instance court and E corporations, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiff's assertion
A. Unlike the conclusion of the insurance contract, the insurance contract of this case was concluded for the purpose of unlawfully acquiring the insurance proceeds, and thus, is null and void due to an act contrary to good morals and other social order under Article 103 of the Civil Code, and thus, the confirmation is sought. The insurance proceeds paid by the Plaintiff to the Defendant and the damages for delay are to be recovered as unjust enrichment.
B. The insurance contract of this case continues to be a contract.