A. Defendant A, B, and C shall have full payment of KRW 22,222,222 and each of the said money from April 1, 2012.

A. The deceased I (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on August 6, 2010, and the deceased’s family member was the husband of the Defendant D and E, E, and H (which are the husband’s children). The deceased’s children were the children of Defendant A, B, and H.

B. On September 27, 2010, E and H filed a waiver of inheritance with the Suwon District Court Branch of 2010 Madan1107, and the said declaration was accepted on November 19, 2010.

[Grounds for recognition] Gap evidence Nos. 3-1 to 4, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. The parties' assertion

A. The plaintiff asserted on November 30, 2009 lent KRW 1.2% per month to the deceased and KRW 100 million on December 30, 2010. At the time, the defendant D guaranteed the deceased's debt to the plaintiff. After the deceased died on August 6, 2010, he/she was the deceased's spouse Eul-, his/her child, and the defendant A, B, and C (hereinafter referred to as the "Bus Defendants") who are their children upon the renunciation of inheritance by the above E and H were co-inheritors. Thus, the defendant D was the joint and several surety of the deceased and the deceased, and the remaining Defendants were jointly and severally liable to pay damages for delay corresponding to the above KRW 9,99,99,99, and each of the above KRW 222,222,222, and 22,222, and 22,222, and each of the above shares of inheritance.

B. The Defendant’s assertion merely borrowed KRW 600 million from the Mine Resources Corporation, and did not borrow KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff, which is the subsidiary company of the above mineral resources. The Plaintiff filed a duplicate claim against the Defendants even though the above KRW 100 million was part of the loans to the Deceased, and even if the Deceased borrowed the above KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff, the Defendant D, the spouse of the Deceased’s spouse, by refusal of inheritance, becomes the sole inheritance of the deceased’s obligations by E and H, who is the deceased’s children, even if the deceased borrowed the above KRW 100 million from the Plaintiff. Therefore, the remaining claims against the Defendants are without merit.

3. Determination.