1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against the defendant exceeding the amount ordered to be paid below shall be revoked.

1. The reasons for this Court concerning this part of the basic facts are as follows: (a) the following is added between the 8th 6 and the 7th 7 of the judgment of the first instance; (b) the 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 58th 1 and 2; and (c) the 8th 9th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 8th 9th 1st 1. The part of the “1. Basic Facts” in the reasoning for the

1) On May 15, 2015, the Plaintiff filed a claim for the reimbursement of the total amount of damages incurred by the instant accident as a joint tortfeasor, as the first preliminary tortfeasor, against the Plaintiff, against the Plaintiff, the lessor, YTB, G, and D, a lessor, for damages arising from the primary tort, against the claim for reimbursement for damages arising from the subrogation of the damage claim of Gyeonggi-do and AB, a victim, and the second preliminary joint tortfeasor.

(Seoul Eastern District Court 2015Gahap104198) 2) On June 8, 2017, the court of first instance partially accepted the second preliminary claim against G on the ground that the Plaintiff, as a joint tortfeasor under Article 760 of the Civil Act, is jointly liable for damages to Gyeonggi-do and AB, etc., and thus, the Plaintiff’s disbursement of expenses is limited to the Plaintiff’s performance of his/her liability for damages. The Plaintiff’s primary and first preliminary claim is dismissed on the ground that all of the costs incurred by the Plaintiff as a joint tortfeasor (20%, Defendant 10%, Squents, Squents, and G 35%) may exercise the right of indemnity against each of the costs incurred by the Plaintiff as a joint tortfeasor (20%, Defendant 10%, Squents, and G 35%). However, the court of first instance rendered a judgment dismissing the second preliminary claim against D on the ground that D cannot be seen as the user of G.).