All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined (to the extent of supplement in case of any statement in the supplemental appellate brief not timely filed).

1. As to the ground of appeal No. 1, the lower court found the deceased’s experience of depression due to continuous verbal abuse and insult during his military life at the time of the instant accident, and on that ground, found the deceased suffering from mental illness.

However, the court below rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that the deceased’s death constitutes damage caused by the insured’s mental illness, which is exempt from exemption under Article 16(1)6 of the Clause of the Insurance Contract of this case, due to extreme stress due to continuous verbal abuse and insult, etc. while the deceased was in a state of being unable to make a free decision due to mental illness. Rather, the court below rejected the Plaintiff’s assertion that the deceased’s death constitutes damage caused by the insured’s mental illness, which is the cause of exemption under Article 16(1)6 of the terms of the Insurance Contract of this case, where the entire military unit formed an exclusive atmosphere for the deceased in relation to the change of assignment to overcome this.

The judgment below

In light of the records, the above determination by the court below is just, and contrary to the allegations in the grounds of appeal, the court below did not err by misapprehending the legal principles on the interpretation of the defective or mental disease exemption clause, or by violating the Supreme Court precedents or by failing to exhaust all necessary reasons, inconsistent reasoning

2. As to the grounds of appeal Nos. 2 and 3, the lower court, on the grounds as stated in its reasoning, is reasonable to deem that the deceased was killed in a situation where free decision-making is impossible or substantially limited, and thus, the instant accident results in death.