beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant A, B, C, and D Co., Ltd. are jointly and severally 628,69,137 won and 201,891,934 won among them.
Reasons
1. Judgment on the plaintiff's claim
(a) The facts subsequent to the facts of recognition do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged by comprehensively taking into account the overall purport of the pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence of 1 to 6, Eul evidence of 1, 2, and Eul evidence of 1.
(1) The fact of the Plaintiff’s occurrence of indemnity is as stated in the attached Form.
(2) Since the final and conclusive Chuncheon District Court Decision 2003Kadan6708, M, a joint and several surety, died, and M’s heir N,O, P, Q, and R renounced inheritance.
(3) After the sentence of the above judgment, K died as a joint and several surety, and the heir, Defendant E, F, G, and H reported the inheritance limited approval by the Seoul Family Court No. 2010-Ma1489, and the inheritance limited approval report was accepted on April 26, 2010.
(4) After the sentence of the above judgment, L, a joint and several surety, died, and there was Defendant I, C, J and S, T, and U with K’s heir. Among them, Defendant C, S, and U renounced inheritance. Defendant I, and J filed a report of inheritance limited acceptance with the Busan Family Court Decision 2014Ra1542, and the report of inheritance limited acceptance was accepted on June 12, 2014.
B. According to the above findings of the determination, the Plaintiff is jointly and severally liable to pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 628,69,137 and the amount of delay damages calculated by the rate of 19% per annum from October 8, 2013 to the date of full payment. ② The remaining Defendants are jointly and severally liable with the Defendant Company A, B, C, and D Co., Ltd. within the scope of inherited property, and each inheritance share (the inheritance share of Defendant E, F, G, and H is 1/5; Defendant I and J are 1/3) among the above amounts.
2. Determination as to Defendant B and C’s assertion
A. Defendant B’s assertion that Defendant B could not respond to the Plaintiff’s claim on the grounds that Defendant B obtained qualified acceptance.
The fact that Defendant B received the qualified acceptance is as seen earlier, but the Plaintiff.