1.The judgment of the first instance shall be modified as follows:

Defendant 1, Jeollabuk-do, as well as KRW 57,122,627.

1. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is that the plaintiff paid KRW 228,490,518 in total in the amount of KRW 117,329,840 on August 11, 2010, and KRW 60,160,670 on August 13, 201, and KRW 228,490,510 on the 17th day of the same month, and KRW 228,490,510 on the 17th day of the same month. However, in light of the statement of evidence No. 2 of the court of first instance, this is identical to the statement of the court of first instance on the 19th day on August 11, 2010 in addition to the fact that the court paid KRW 420,518 on the 17th day of the same month."

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff's assertion that the accident of this case did not have the plaintiff's negligence, and since the defendant church neglected the duty of care to supervise and supervise the deceased who is the attending participant as the organizer of the outdoor meeting event, it is responsible for the accident of this case. The proviso of Article 27 (5) of the former River Act provides that the Mayor/Do governor shall implement the maintenance and repair of national rivers. The proviso of Article 59 of the former River Act provides that the Mayor/Do governor shall bear the expenses necessary for the maintenance and management of river works for national river maintenance. Thus, the defendant Jeollabuk-do's responsibility for the accident of this case due to defects in river management of this case is recognized as well. Since the defendants' negligence ratio is 50%, the defendants shall jointly and severally pay 28,490,518 won as the amount of joint immunity to the plaintiff as compensation.

B. Defendant Jeollabuk-do’s assertion that Defendant Jeollabuk-do performed the duties of maintenance and repair of the instant river constitutes the delegated duties of an agency and constitutes the subject of such duties. Defendant Jeollabuk-do is merely the Plaintiff, and Defendant Jeollabuk-do was merely a public official under its jurisdiction, and thus, Defendant Jeollabuk-do is solely liable for final liability in the internal relationship between the Plaintiff and Defendant Jeollabuk-do.