The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the Plaintiff.

The grounds of appeal are examined.

The court below held that the lawsuit of this case is unlawful on the ground that the plaintiff's claim seeking payment of KRW 300,150,000 among the subrogation claim against the defendant by the defendant of J, etc. by subrogation of I, J, etc. for the preservation of the plaintiff's claim against I, on the ground that the performance of subrogation claim cannot be deemed as having a relation to the performance of subrogation claim in order to claim the performance of the plaintiff's subrogation claim, and it cannot be deemed that the fulfillment of subrogation claim does not require the requirements of insolvency such as J, etc. in the exercise of subrogation right, and that the necessity of preservation is not recognized only

In light of the relevant legal principles and records, the lower court did not err in its judgment by misapprehending the legal doctrine regarding the requirements and judgment of debtor's insolvency in subrogation, or by exceeding the bounds of the principle of free evaluation of evidence against logical and empirical rules.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed, and the costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.