1. The appeal by the primary defendant is dismissed.

2. The appeal cost shall be borne by the primary defendant.

purport, purport, and.

The plaintiff filed a claim for the payment of the purchase price and construction cost, etc. that Defendant B paid to the primary defendant, and Defendant C filed a claim for the payment of damages on the basis of a tort with the primary defendant. The court of first instance rejected part of the claim against the primary defendant and dismissed the claim against the primary defendant.

In response to this, only the primary defendant appealed, but only one of the primary co-litigants and the conjunctive co-litigants files an appeal in a subjective preliminary co-litigation, the confirmation of the claim part against the other co-litigants shall be prevented, and the appeal shall be transferred to the appellate court (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2009Da43355, Feb. 24, 201). As such, the part of the claim against the conjunctive defendant by the primary defendant's appeal became the scope of the trial of this court.

In addition, the main defendant raised an objection on July 13, 2020 against the ruling of recommending reconciliation of this court, and the conjunctive defendant did not raise an objection. However, the ruling of recommending reconciliation of this court is based on the obligation to pay the amount to the primary defendant against the conjunctive defendant, and thus, it is related to the rights and obligations among the defendants, and it is contrary to equity when allowing separate confirmation, and it is deemed that the decision of recommending reconciliation of the conjunctive defendant may result in a violation of the legislative intent of Article 70 (1) of the Civil Procedure Act, which aims at the unification of litigation among the co-litigants with conflicting interests, and therefore, it is reasonable to view that the decision of recommending reconciliation of the conjunctive defendant is not allowed

(See Supreme Court Decision 2006Da57872 Decided July 10, 2008, and Supreme Court Decision 2014Da75202 Decided March 20, 2015). Therefore, even if only the primary defendant raised an objection against the decision of recommending reconciliation in this court, the said decision of recommending reconciliation is not finalized against both the Plaintiff and the Defendants.