1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, Plaintiff B, C, L,O, Q, S, T, U, X, Z, and AA, corresponding to the money ordered to be paid below.

1. The reasons for the court's explanation of this case are as follows. The defendant asserts that "AD's testimony and testimony of a witness of the court of first instance" is added, "No. 15 of the court of first instance" is as follows. The separate list No. 1 and the separate list No. 2 are as stated in the reasons for the judgment of the court of first instance, except for the addition to "amount of claim and amount of award by plaintiff" and the separate list No. 2 of the separate list No. 1 and the separate list No. 2 are as stated in the separate list No. 1 and the separate list No. 2 of the separate list No. 2 of the court of first instance. 2 of the court of first instance. 2 of the defendant's assertion that the defendant's defense of exemption is as stated in the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, since the defendant knew that AD's act does not fall under the defendant's act of execution, or was not known due to gross negligence, and therefore, the defendant does not lawfully bear an employer's liability if it appears that the other employee's act did not have any serious negligence.

Supreme Court Decision 2009Da87621 Decided February 25, 2010