A. Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in each statement in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including various numbers), the following facts can be acknowledged: (a) the cause of the claim indicated in the separate sheet (Provided, That the creditor is deemed as the plaintiff and debtor B; (b) and the deceased B died on August 31, 2012; (c) the defendant, who is his/her father, inherited all the deceased’s property; and (d) the defendant, who was his/her father, inherited the deceased’s property on January 3, 2013, as the Seoul Family Court 2012-Ma

B. Therefore, within the scope of property inherited from the deceased B, the Defendant is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff the agreed damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from June 2, 2016 to the date of full payment as to KRW 647,268,223 of the balance of the principal and interest of loan and the balance of KRW 369,00,000 of the principal and interest of the Plaintiff.

2. The defendant's assertion as to the defendant is that the property inherited from the deceased is in total of KRW 5,00,000,000, which is inherited from the deceased, and this is no longer inherited property from the deceased for funeral expenses of the deceased. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is unreasonable.

On the other hand, the facts that the defendant's active property in the list of inherited property received by qualified acceptance includes lease deposit claims 5,00,000,000 and corporeal movables such as household effects does not conflict between the parties, or can be recognized by comprehensively considering the overall purport of the pleadings. However, the property inherited from the deceased is included not only in the list of inherited property attached to the above list but also in the case where there are inherited property not included in the above list. Thus, the defendant's above assertion on the premise that only the inherited property included in the above list is inherited by the defendant from the deceased is without merit.

3. The plaintiff's claim is reasonable and it is so decided as per Disposition.