1.Annexed in the Schedule;

(a) against the Defendant A of the Plaintiff (Counterclaim Defendant) regarding the first insurance contract;

(b) paragraphs 2 through 2.

1. Basic facts

A. On March 28, 2014, Defendant A concluded the first insurance contract with the Plaintiff Company via the brokerage of D, an insurance solicitor of the Plaintiff Company, as indicated in the separate sheet.

B. From March 12, 2014 to February 12, 2015, Defendant B concluded an insurance contract between the Plaintiff Company and the Plaintiff Company via the aforementioned D’s brokerage.

In addition, Defendant B concluded each insurance contract No. 1 attached Table No. 27 of February 27, 2012 with the Plaintiff Company through the brokerage of the above D, and the insurance contract No. 2 attached Table No. 2 of March 21, 2014.

C. On March 28, 2014, Defendant C concluded an insurance contract with the Plaintiff Company Nos. 6, 7, as indicated in the [Attachment List] through the aforementioned D’s brokerage.

Defendant B paid 32 premiums in relation to the attached Table 1 insurance contracts, 18 premiums in relation to the attached Table 2 insurance contracts, and 14 premiums in relation to the attached Table 2 insurance contracts in relation to the attached Table 2 insurance contracts, 3 and 4 insurance premiums in relation to each of the attached Table 3 and 4 insurance contracts in relation to the attached Table 1, and 3 minutes in relation to the attached Table 5 insurance contracts in relation to the attached Table 2 insurance contracts, respectively.

E. On March 4, 2016, the Defendants asserted that incomplete sales, such as lack of product description, were conducted on the Plaintiff’s website, and filed a civil petition demanding the Plaintiff to refund the full amount of the insurance premium paid for each of the instant insurance.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 17 (including each number), the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The plaintiff alleged that the plaintiff's claim against the defendant A did not exist with respect to the insurance contract No. 1 in the attached list, and that the plaintiff's claim for the return of the insurance premium against the defendant A does not exist with respect to the insurance contract No. 1 in the attached list. Thus, the defendant A has the assertion, burden of proof, and there is no assertion or proof on

Therefore, the plaintiff's obligation to return the insurance premium payable to the defendant A in relation to the above insurance contract is the obligation.