A. After entering into a verbal contract with D, the Plaintiff supplied valves and pipes materials from November 30, 2014 to June 30, 2015, with a total of KRW 49,211,61, and the Plaintiff did not receive KRW 42,774,738 among them.

B. The Defendant issued and delivered seven copies of household checks equivalent to KRW 21 million to the Plaintiff out of the unpaid price of delivered goods, but was rejected due to the shortage of deposits on July 2015.

C. Around July 17, 2015, Defendant A and C, who was his wife, succeeded to the inheritance of Defendant B and C. The Defendants filed an application with the Seoul Family Court 2015 D’s 8185 inheritance approval, which was accepted on September 24, 2015.

[Ground of recognition] Nos. 1, 2, and 3 (including paper numbers), Eul evidence No. 1, and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts, the Plaintiff: Provided, however, within the scope of the property inherited from the network D, Defendant A, the inheritor of the network D, the price for the goods, is also KRW 18,332,030 corresponding to the statutory shares of inheritance, and Defendant B, the heir of the network D, Defendant B, and C, the heir of the deceased D, each of the above amounts of KRW 12,221,354 corresponding to the statutory shares of inheritance, and each of the above amounts, from September 22, 2015, the day following the delivery of the copy of the complaint of this case.

9. There is an obligation to pay 20% per annum under the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition, etc. of Legal Proceedings and 15% per annum from the following day to the full payment date.

(1) The Plaintiff filed a claim for damages for delay at the rate of 20% per annum for the period after October 1, 2015, but the interest rate exceeding 15% per annum pursuant to the provision on statutory interest rate under the main sentence of Article 3(1) of the Act on Special Cases Concerning Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings as amended on September 25, 2015 is without merit). 3. If the Plaintiff’s claim in this case is reasonable within the above scope of recognition, the Plaintiff’s claim in this case is acceptable, and the remainder is dismissed as it is without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.