1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendant D shall be dismissed.

2. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendant B and C is all dismissed.

1. An appeal as to whether an appeal against Defendant D is lawful may be filed only for a trial disadvantageous to himself/herself, and whether a trial is disadvantageous to an appellant shall be determined as at the time of the filing of the appeal on the basis of the text of the judgment, and as such, an appeal against the entire winning judgment is unlawful as there is no benefit.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2007Da20235, Jul. 13, 2007). The first instance court accepted the Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant D in its entirety. The Plaintiff’s appeal against Defendant D is unlawful as there is no benefit of appeal.

2. Determination as to claims against Defendant B and C

A. The court's explanation on this part of the facts of recognition is the same as the statement of basic facts among the grounds of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, this part is cited in accordance with Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

B. The Plaintiff’s assertion and the Defendants jointly and severally liable to E, and the Plaintiff paid KRW 100 million to E. In light of the Plaintiff’s intentional and negligent act, the degree of illegality, and the degree of contribution to the occurrence of damages, etc., the Plaintiff’s internal burden is deemed not to exist. Therefore, the Defendants are jointly liable to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 100 million for indemnity and its delay damages.

C. 1) Determination 1) In an internal relationship between a multiple quasi-joint and several liability parties, there may be certain portions to be borne according to the principle of equity. The portion to be borne is determined according to each of the parties’ intent and negligence, and in a case where one of the quasi-joint and several liability parties jointly and severally liable has obtained joint immunity by repaying not less than the amount to be borne by him/her, he/she may exercise the right to reimbursement against the other quasi-joint and several liability parties in proportion to the amount to be borne (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2005Da19378, Jan. 27, 2006). In addition,