1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The reasoning of the court's explanation concerning this case is as follows. The plaintiff's argument that the plaintiff emphasizes or added part of the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case is identical to the statement of the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance except the following "2. Additional Judgment". Thus, the court's explanation concerning this case is acceptable in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

The 2nd sentence of the first instance judgment, the 16th sentence, 20th sentence, and 3th sentence of the 17th sentence, "the plaintiff" shall be considered as "D", respectively.

The defendant H in Part 7, No. 7, and No. 10 of the first instance judgment "H" are raised as "H".

The 5th sentence of the first instance judgment "204Gahap24919" in Note 2 to "2014Gahap24919" shall be deemed as "2014Gahap24919."

2. Additional determination

가. 보험자대위에 관한 준거법의 결정 갑 제31호증의 11의 기재에 의하면, 이 사건 보험증권에 “이 보험증권 하에서 발생하는 일체의 책임 문제는 영국의 법과 관습에 의해 규율된다(All questions of liability arising under this policy are to be governed by the laws and customs of England.)”는 준거법 약관(이하 ‘이 사건 약관’이라 한다)이 기재되어 있는 사실이 인정된다.

Article 25(1) main text and Article 25(2) of the Private International Act provides that “a contract shall be governed by the law in which the parties have chosen explicitly or implicitly,” and Article 26(1) provides that “if the parties have not selected the applicable law, the contract shall be governed by the law of the country most closely related to the contract.”

Therefore, where the parties choose the governing law only for a part of the contract with foreign elements, the law chosen by the parties as to the relevant part shall be the governing law. However, with respect to the part without choice of governing law, the law of the country most closely related to the contract shall be the governing law (see Supreme Court Decision 2015Da5194, Jun. 23, 2016).