这是一起人寿保险纠纷案件。保险责任含死亡保险 ,但无被保险人签名 ;投保人未在续期保费宽限期内交纳保险费 ,致使保单失效。此案事实清楚 ,证据充足 ,但一、二审法院在判决上 ,均未明确采用死亡保险无被保险人签名为无效合同的法律规定 ,依据是投保单无投保人签名 ,而此案事实上投保人已确认投保单有效 ,认定保险合同无效 ,其法律依据欠妥当 ,可见 ,一、二审法院的法官们对保险的理解还有一定差距 This is a life insurance dispute case. The insurance cover includes death insurance but is not signed by the insured; the insured person does not pay the premium within the grace period of the renewed premium, resulting in the expiry of the policy. The facts of the case are clear and the evidence is sufficient. However, none of the courts of first instance and second instance has explicitly adopted the legal provisions on death insurance without the signature of the insured person as an invalid contract, based on the fact that the insurance policy was signed without the policyholder, and the case was in fact insured People have confirmed that the insurance policy is valid, finds that the insurance contract is invalid, and its legal basis is not proper. Thus, there is still a certain gap between the judges of the courts of first and second instance in understanding insurance