beta
(영문) 춘천지방법원 원주지원 2017.01.19 2015가단36111

대여금

Text

1. The Defendants shall be limited to KRW 33,33,333, respectively, to the Plaintiff within the scope of the property inherited from the network I.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. On July 25, 2005, the Plaintiff lent KRW 100,000,000 to I as of November 25, 2015.

B. I died on December 16, 2009.

C. On January 6, 2010, I’s wife J (around January 6, 2010, the name prior to the name is K), and his child L filed a report to waive the deceased I’s inheritance of his/her property in the Chuncheon District Court 2009-Ma427 case, and the said court rendered a decision to accept the declaration of renunciation of inheritance on January 6, 2010.

In addition, I's children D, M, and G filed a report to waive the deceased I's property inheritance in the Chuncheon District Court 2010-Ma47 case, and the above court decided to accept the report of renunciation of inheritance on February 26, 2010.

I’s wife J, children D, M, G, or L’s succession, the Defendants, the grandchildren of I, became the inheritor of I.

(1/3 of each share in inheritance).

The Defendants filed a report on the qualified acceptance of the net I’s property in the Chuncheon District Court 2012-Ma48 case, and the said court decided to accept the qualified acceptance report on February 22, 2012.

[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 1 through 9, Evidence Nos. 1 and 2, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of recognition, I is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the borrowed amount of KRW 100,000,000 and delay damages therefor. Since the Defendants inherited the property of I with one-third qualified acceptance, the Defendants are obligated to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of KRW 33,33,33, and 15% per annum under the Act on Special Cases Concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, etc., from December 23, 2016 to the date of full payment, as requested by the Plaintiff, to the Plaintiff within the scope of the property inherited from I.

3. It is decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices, on the ground that the plaintiff's claim for the conclusion is reasonable.