The defendant's compulsory execution against the plaintiff on November 21, 2017 by the Seoul Central District Court Decision 2017 Ghana159486 decided on November 21, 2017.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. 1) On April 27, 2017, the Defendant is the deceased E (hereinafter “the deceased”).

2) The lawsuit seeking the payment of the assignee fee against B (Seoul Central District Court 2017 Ghana159486, hereinafter referred to as “instant lawsuit”).

(2) On June 12, 2017, the deceased was revealed to have died before the said lawsuit, and on June 12, 2017, the Defendant filed an application for correction of the indication of the party to request the deceased to correct the indication of the party. (2) Relevant documents, such as the written complaint of the instant lawsuit, the written application for correction of indication of the party, the purport of the claim, and the written application for modification of the cause of the claim, were served by the Seo-gu F and G, Gwangju, the Plaintiff’s domicile, and the documents asserted as the Plaintiff’s fraud were served.

3) In the instant lawsuit, on November 21, 2017, the judgment holding that “the Plaintiff shall pay to the Defendant 4,368,003 won and 2,209,01 won among them at the rate of 20% per annum from February 1, 2007 to the date of full payment” (hereinafter “instant judgment”).

The judgment was rendered and the judgment became final and conclusive around that time. (B) On April 21, 2020, the Plaintiff filed a report of inheritance limited acceptance (Seoul Family Court Decision 2020Ra2393) with respect to inheritance of the deceased’s property, and on May 27, 2020, accepted the report of qualified acceptance (hereinafter “instant decision”).

(C) has been made a final judgment. [Grounds for recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2 to 5, Eul evidence 1 and 3 (including each number, and hereinafter each number), each number shall be included.

each entry, the purport of the whole pleading

2. The assertion and judgment

A. 1) The Plaintiff received the instant decision that accepted the report of qualified acceptance on the inherited property of the deceased. Accordingly, the Plaintiff’s obligation under the instant judgment should be borne only within the scope of the inherited property from the deceased. As such, compulsory execution based on the said judgment should be conducted only within the scope of the property inherited to the deceased. 2) The Defendant should be subject to compulsory execution based on the said judgment.