1. The judgment of the court of first instance, including the claims modified by this court, shall be modified as follows:

The defendant.

1. The reasons for this part of the underlying facts are as stated in Paragraph 1 of the judgment of the first instance, except for the use of “Ulsan District Court 2017Da3170” in Paragraph 1 of Article 6 of the reasoning of the judgment of the first instance to “Ulsan District Court 2017Ma3170, Ulsan District Court 2017Ma3170,” and thus, this part is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. Summary of the plaintiffs' assertion

A. The contract concluded on May 9, 2016 between D and the Defendant, which was based on the agreement made on April 5, 2017 under Articles 1 and 1 of the instant agreement, provides that the Defendant shall lease the instant equipment to the Defendant. As such, the Defendant is obligated to pay USD 800,00 to the Plaintiffs who acquired the instant contractual claims pursuant to Articles 1 and 2 of the instant agreement and Article 2 of the Agreement on April 5, 2017.

(2) 예비적 청구원인 ㈎ 이 사건 계약이 임대차계약이 아니라 도급계약이라고 하더라도, 피고는 이 사건 합의 제1조 및 2017. 4. 5.자 합의 b조에 따라 이 사건 계약상의 채권을 양수한 원고들에게 D가 2017. 3. 1.부터 이 사건 사고일인 2017. 4. 21.까지 수행한 공사 기성고에 따라 공사 기성금으로 미화 34만 달러를 지급할 의무가 있다.

㈏ 또한 이 사건 계약이 임대차계약 또는 도급계약인지와 관계없이, 원고들이 양수한 이 사건 계약상의 채권이 D와 피고의 공동과실로 발생한 이 사건 사고로 인해 소멸하거나 발생하지 않게 되었으므로, 피고는 위와 같은 공동불법행위로 인하여 원고들이 입은 미화 80만 달러 상당의 손해를 배상할 책임이 있다.

B. In accordance with Article 2 of the instant agreement, Article 2 of the instant agreement, which is the primary cause of the claim, has hindered the execution of the Defendant’s work, upon the instant provisional attachment application, the Plaintiffs filed the instant provisional attachment application.