대여금 등
1. The defendants' appeal is dismissed.
2. The costs of appeal shall be within the scope of property inherited from the network D.
The reasoning for the court’s explanation of this case is as follows: “Defendant A, B, and C filed a report on qualified acceptance with the Seoul Family Court 2013-Ma10827, Jun. 26, 2014; and “Defendant A, B, and C received a report on qualified acceptance with the above court on June 26, 2014,” and “Defendant A, B, and C added “within the scope of property inherited from the network D” under the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act, except for adding “within the scope of property inherited from the network D” as stated in the third part of the judgment of the first instance court. As such, this is cited as it is in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.
If so, the judgment of the court of first instance, which found the result of the reduction of claim in the trial, is justifiable, and the appeal by the defendants is dismissed as it is without merit.
However, Article 1-A of the decision of the court of first instance was changed by the reduction of the plaintiff's claim in the court of first instance as stated in paragraph 3 of the decision.