1. All appeals filed by Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) B and Defendant D Association are dismissed.

2. The costs of appeal are assessed against the Defendant (Counterclaim Plaintiff) and.

1. In the first instance court’s trial scope, the Plaintiff claimed a contract amount against Defendant B as the principal lawsuit, and the Defendant B claimed a mutual-aid amount against the Defendant Association as the counterclaim. The first instance court accepted all the Plaintiff’s claim against the Defendants, and dismissed Defendant B’s counterclaim.

Accordingly, Defendant B is limited to the part of the judgment of the court of first instance, and the defendant Association appealed against the part of the judgment of the court of first instance regarding the claim against the defendant Association. As such, the scope of the judgment of this court is limited to the part concerning the claim against the defendant B and the part concerning the claim against the plaintiff Association.

2. The reasons why the court of first instance should explain are either written or added as follows, and except for the addition of the judgment as to the allegations made by the Defendants in this court, the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance (excluding the part concerning the counterclaim and the part concerning the counterclaim claim by Defendant B) is as stated in the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, thereby citing it as it is by the text of

The "Defendant C" in the first instance judgment is all referred to as "C".

On the 8th anniversary of the judgment of the court of first instance, the "liability for the car of use" in the 3th sentence is raised as the "user's liability".

In the first instance court’s 17th page 17, the phrase “pro scheduled” was read as “A scheduled” [Defendant B, by lending to C a certified judicial scrivener registration certificate (C and his punishment E were respectively registered as the chief of the office among the officers exclusively in charge of the office of certified judicial scrivener B), and C comprehensively delegated the authority to conclude a delegation contract with the mandator regarding overall affairs of certified judicial scrivener, such as registration-related affairs, using his name.”

The 19th sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance and the 19th sentence of the 19th sentence "tax amount payable" shall be regarded as "paid tax amount".

The 19th sentence of the judgment of the court of first instance (hereinafter referred to as the "amount sent") shall be called "the receipt of remittance".

The 6th of the first instance judgment's 20th of the 20th of the 20th of the 196th of the 20th of the 195

3. Added.