1. The plaintiff's appeal is dismissed.

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

3. Of the purport of the judgment of the court of first instance, "50,788."

1. In view of the evidence submitted by the plaintiff in this court and witness G and I testimony presented by the court of first instance as well as the fact-finding and judgment by the court of first instance as justified, even if the court of first instance cited the evidence duly examined by the court of first instance.

Therefore, the reasoning of this court’s judgment is as follows: (a) adding the following “the part added to 2.2” following the first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s fourth instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s conclusion is identical to the ground of the first instance judgment’s second instance judgment’s judgment.

2. Additional part of “C. Accordingly, the Defendant is liable to pay the Plaintiff damages for nonperformance or tort, which the sum of KRW 778,990 among the medical expenses incurred by the Plaintiff due to legacy after the occurrence of the instant accident, and KRW 50,778,990 (= KRW 778,990, KRW 500,000) and damages for delay therefrom, regardless of the Plaintiff’s occurrence of legacy after the occurrence of the instant accident, as well as KRW 50,78,990 (= KRW 778,990, KRW 50,000).”

3. Determination on this safety defense

A. The main point of the argument is that the Defendant, as the content of the claim for damages sought by the Plaintiff against H of the farming association corporation, the Defendant asserts that there is no standing to be a party in the lawsuit of this case.

B. However, in a performance lawsuit, a person who asserts that he/she is the person entitled to claim performance has standing to sue and has standing to be the defendant, and the plaintiff and the defendant do not need to be the person in charge of performance or the defendant.

(See Supreme Court Decision 96Da13927 delivered on September 18, 1998). Accordingly, insofar as the Plaintiff claims damages against the Defendant, insofar as it is claiming damages against the Defendant, it is recognized that the Defendant has the standing to be a party. Therefore, the Defendant’s principal safety.