1. Of the judgment of the first instance, the part of the Korea Highway Corporation as the conjunctive Defendant is revoked.

1. Scope of the judgment of this court;

A. The lawsuit of this case filed by the Plaintiff against the Defendants is a subjective preliminary co-litigation under Article 70(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, which is permitted in a case where the claim against the Defendants is legally incompatible (including the case where the claim is not compatible with each other even in the case where the manager of the road at the point of accident is a selective fact-finding who is who is the Defendants).

Article 70(1) of the Civil Procedure Act concerning subjective co-litigation provides that “legal compatibility” means a relationship in which the legal effect of either of the two claims is acknowledged as different evaluations of the same facts, or where both claims are not accepted because the legal effect of either of the two claims is denied, or where either of the two claims becomes a result of affirming or denying the legal effect of either of the two claims by factual basis or by a selective fact-finding that constitutes the cause of the claim, and thereby denying or affirming the legal effect of the other claims, and where both claims affect the grounds for determining the other claims, and thus, the process of determining each claim is necessarily mutually combined. This includes cases where the legal effect of either claim cannot be compatible with each other, as well as cases where the substantive law is incompatible with each other, as well as cases where the legal effect of either of the two claims is incompatible with each other.

(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da7076, Sept. 29, 201). The first instance court dismissed the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant Republic of Korea, and accepted the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendant Corporation.

As seen earlier, the part of the claim against Defendant Republic of Korea, which is a subjective conjunctive co-litigation under Article 70(1) of the Civil Procedure Act, is reversed, and is included in the scope of the judgment of this court. Therefore, the judgment of this court is against the Defendant.