(However, the part against Codefendant C Codefendant in the first instance trial, which became separate and conclusive, is excluded. In the third 10th 10th 1st 10th 3th 10th 3th 10th 1st 1st 10th 1st 1st 1st 11st 1st 200, “L” in the fourth 7th 4th 105,691, “ELDr” in the fourth 8th 8th 2nd 415,072,064, “other company” in the first 15th 15th 15th 6th 1st 15th 15,17,36,37, and 47th 15th 2nd 1st 15th 1st 6th 1st 1st 15,17,37,47,” respectively.

From 6th to 7th of the judgment of the first instance court, the 6th to 7th of the judgment shall be followed as follows.

【1) In a civil trial, even if the facts acknowledged in the judgment on other civil cases, etc. are not subject to detention, the facts established in the judgment on the already established civil cases shall not be rejected without any reasonable reasoning, unless there are special circumstances. In particular, there are the same facts that the two previous and previous civil cases are identical to the parties to the dispute and form the basis of the dispute, but the same is more so in a case where a new claim may be filed as a result of a conflict of res judicata.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2008Da92312, 92329 Decided September 24, 2009, etc.). 2) The Plaintiff made ELD 505,691 ELDr supplied by Defendant B to the Plaintiff, and disbursed 415,072,064 won at its expense. However, the fact that all of the changes occurred due to product defects is as seen earlier (the Defendant B was replaced by ELDr until the judgment became final and conclusive in the pertinent lawsuit).