1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

2. The costs of appeal shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

purport, purport, and.

1. The court's explanation concerning this case is to delete the overall defense of No. 6-10 of the judgment of the court of first instance. The plaintiff's assertion is identical to the reasoning of the judgment of the court of first instance, except for adding the judgment of the court of first instance as to this case, and thus, we accept it as it is by the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure

2. Judgment on the plaintiff's assertion in this court

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion D had a claim for the refund of the lease deposit amount of KRW 200 million with respect to the Yeonsu-gu Incheon apartment and K apartment (hereinafter “J apartment”) at the time of death, but Defendant C received a refund of KRW 200 million with respect to the lease deposit for the attached real estate (hereinafter “the instant apartment”), which is the inherited property of D, and partly appropriated the lease deposit amount of KRW 350 million with respect to the attached real estate (hereinafter “the instant apartment”), or paid KRW 20 million with respect to the above lease deposit of KRW 20 million, but instead partly appropriated the deposit amount of KRW 350 million with respect to the instant apartment after returning the deposit amount of KRW 20 million.

As above, since the lease deposit amount of KRW 350 million for the apartment of this case was partially appropriated with the financial resources of KRW 200 million for the claim for the return of the lease deposit for J apartment, which is the inherited property of Defendant C, the lease deposit return claim for the apartment of this case against Defendant C (hereinafter “the lease deposit claim of this case”) maintains the identity as inherited property as a modified property.

Therefore, the Plaintiff may exercise the right to claim the refund of the lease deposit against the Defendant B based on the seizure and collection order of the instant case.

B. Determination is evident that the claim for the return of the lease deposit of this case was not inherited property since D was born on December 10, 2017, after D died on May 23, 2013.

Even if the plaintiff asserts, the defendant C collected the claim for the return of the lease deposit with respect to J Apartment.