1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against each of the plaintiffs, which orders payment, shall be instituted.

1. The reasoning of the court’s explanation concerning this case is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except for the replacement of an urban daily wage calculation table in the attached Form of the judgment of the court of first instance by reflecting the rise in urban daily wage after the date of closing the argument of the court of first instance, and therefore, it is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Thus, the defendant's conclusion is that it is reasonable for the plaintiff A to dispute about the existence and scope of the obligation to repay 37,410,932 won cited in the first instance trial from October 18, 201, which is the date of the accident in this case, 5% per annum as stipulated in the Civil Act until August 11, 2015, 3,629,65 won, which are 10% per annum as stipulated in the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings from the next day to the date of full payment, 20% per annum as stipulated in the above 1.0% per annum as stated in the above 1.0% per annum as to damages for delay and 41,040,580 won as stated in the attached table for calculation of damages, 10% per annum as to damages for delay from the above 20.8% per annum as to damages for delay from the next day to the 20.15% per annum as stated in the above 10.5% of the Civil Act, 20% per annum as to the above.