1. Revocation of the first instance judgment.

2. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

3. All costs of the lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

1. The reasoning for the court’s explanation on this part of the facts is that the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is identical to that of the relevant part of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance, except where “1. 20 on January 29, 2016” was used as “1. 20 on January 29, 2016,” and thus, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. The parties' assertion

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion that the insured of the instant insurance contract was deceased on February 20, 2016.

Therefore, the defendant is liable to pay the insurance proceeds under the insurance contract of this case to the plaintiff as beneficiary.

B. The defendant's assertion ① Since the insurance contract of this case was concluded for the purpose of the plaintiff's wrongful acquisition of insurance money, it is null and void in accordance with Article 103 of the Civil Act against good morals and other social order. ② Since B violated the duty of prior notification at the time of entering into the insurance contract of this case,

3. Determination as to whether the instant insurance contract is null and void under Article 103 of the Civil Act

A. Where a policyholder concludes an insurance contract with an intention to illegally acquire insurance proceeds through a large number of insurance contracts, the payment of insurance proceeds pursuant to the insurance contract concluded for this purpose would be in excess of social reasonableness by encouraging speculative spirit to gain unjust profits through abuse of insurance contracts, thereby impairing the purpose of the insurance system, such as reasonable diversification of risks, destroying the contingencyness of risk occurrence, and causing the sacrifice of a large number of good subscribers, thereby impairing the basis of the insurance system.

Therefore, such an insurance contract shall be null and void against the good morals and other social order stipulated in Article 103 of the Civil Code.

In addition, it is directly recognized whether a policyholder has concluded multiple insurance contracts for the purpose of unjust acquisition of insurance proceeds.