1. The plaintiffs' appeals against the defendants and extended claims in the trial are dismissed in entirety.

2. Filing an appeal;

1. The grounds for the court of the acceptance of the judgment of the first instance concerning this case are stated are as stated in Article 2-b of the judgment of the first instance.

Except for the modification of the part of the judgment of the first instance (from No. 5, No. 21 to No. 79 of the judgment of the court of first instance) as follows, the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance is the same as that of the judgment of the court of first instance. Thus, it shall be cited in accordance with

B. 1) The legal principle related to the claim against Defendant Jeonju-si refers to fluids or physical facilities granted by the State or a local government for a specific public purpose, and if the State or a local government is under ownership, right of lease, or other authority, and the State or a local government is under management, as well as the actual management is under management (see Supreme Court Decision 98Da17381, Oct. 23, 1998). However, if the road in which the accident occurred was under the local government concerned without the recognition of routes or the commencement of public use, it cannot be deemed a public structure (see Supreme Court Decision 80Da2478, Jul. 7, 1981).

In light of the above legal principles, as to whether Defendant Jeonju is a manager of the road in which the instant accident occurred, the evidence submitted by the Plaintiffs alone in light of the following circumstances: (a) it is acknowledged that there is no dispute between the parties to the instant accident, or that Gap’s evidence Nos. 4, 5, 12, 13, 15, 19, Eul’s evidence Nos. 2, 3, 5, 6, 7, Eul’s evidence Nos. 1, and the entire purport of the arguments as to the Korea Highway Corporation of the first instance court; and (b)