logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 의정부지방법원 2020.11.12 2019가단138023
집행문부여에 대한 이의의 소
Text

1. As to the order of payment (2015j6810) between the defendant and the network D District Court in Southyang-si, the South-si Court in 2015j6810.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Defendant issued a payment order ordering payment of KRW 35,00,000 and interest and demand procedure expenses therefor on October 20, 2005 (hereinafter “instant payment order”) upon application for a payment order for a loan claim against D and D, the plaintiff’s mother-friendly, and attached E (Seoul District Court Decision 2005Da6810, Namyang-si, Seoul District Court). This was served on the network D on February 18, 2006 and confirmed on March 5, 2006.

B. D (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on December 17, 2017, and the Plaintiffs succeeded to the deceased’s children, and E inherited the deceased’s property as the deceased’s spouse.

C. On October 25, 2019, the Defendant was granted the instant payment order from the Seoyang-si District Court junior administrative officer, etc. of the Namyang-si court to the Plaintiffs and E as the successor to the deceased.

Plaintiff

B was served on October 30, 2019, while Plaintiff A was served on November 26, 2019, respectively. D.

On November 25, 2019, the Plaintiffs entered “List of Property (2)” in attached Table 2 in the Sung-nam Family Court of Suwon, as inherited property, and reported the special recognition of inheritance. On February 6, 2020, the said court rendered an adjudication to accept the said report (hereinafter “instant adjudication on qualified acceptance”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, 16, 17 and the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. Article 1019(3) of the Civil Act provides that a qualified acceptance may be made within three months from the date of becoming aware of the excess of the inheritance obligation, as well as the case where a simple approval is deemed to have been made under subparagraphs 1 and 2 of Article 1026 of the Civil Act, without gross negligence, without knowledge of the excess of the inheritance obligation, pursuant to Article 1019(1) of the Civil Act. Thus, the fact that the inheritance obligation under Article 1019(3) of the Civil Act exceeds the inherited property is gross negligence.

arrow