1. The appeal filed by the administrator C by the defendant rehabilitation debtor B is dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are against the defendant A.

If one of the main co-litigants and the conjunctive co-litigants files an appeal in a subjective and preliminary co-litigation, the final judgment on the part of the claim against other co-litigants shall be prevented, and the appeal shall be transferred to the appellate court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Du17765, Mar. 27, 2008). In such a case, the subject of the appellate court’s judgment shall be determined in consideration of the need for the final judgment on the conclusion between the main and preliminary co-litigants and their parties.

(See Supreme Court Decision 2009Da7076 Decided September 29, 201, etc.). The Plaintiff sought restitution of unjust enrichment against the primary Defendant A on the ground that the said Defendant did not obtain delegation from the said Defendant on the claim for cancellation refund upon the termination of the instant insurance contract and the receipt thereof. However, in a case where it is recognized that the cancellation refund payment against the Defendant A is a valid repayment against B, it is recognized that the said delegation was made, the Plaintiff sought confirmation of the absence of the obligation to pay cancellation refund against the custodian C of the primary Defendant Rehabilitation Obligor Co., Ltd., the primary Defendant Rehabilitation obligor Co., Ltd., seeking confirmation of the non-existence of the obligation to pay cancellation refund. This is a subjective and preliminary co-litigation relationship in which the other party’s legal effect is denied if recognized. Accordingly, the confirmation of the primary Defendant A by the administrator C of the primary Defendant Rehabilitation Obligor Co., Ltd., Ltd., is interrupted, and thus, this judgment is transferred

Therefore, in the trial of the party, the part of the claim against the primary defendant is also examined.

Basic Facts

Defendant A, from December 16, 201 to December 28, 2012, and from January 29, 2013 to March 20, 2013; and D, from March 20, 2013 to August 18, 2014, was in charge of the representative director of each B; and B, from March 20, 2013 to August 18, 2014, was commenced with the Daejeon District Court 2014hap5012 on September 17, 2014, and C was appointed as a custodian on the same day.

The Plaintiff’s instant case between B and March 8, 2012.