beta
Text
1. Defendant D is within the scope of the property inherited from the network E, and against the Plaintiff A, KRW 340,44,850.
Reasons
1. The plaintiffs' claim against defendant D
A. The summary of the cause of the claim 1) Plaintiff A lent 84,253,500 won to the network E at the interest rate of 2% per month from May 9, 2007 to December 29, 2017. Of these, Plaintiff B was not paid the principal amount of KRW 340,44,850. (2) Plaintiff B lent 164,700,000 to the network E at the interest rate of 2% per month from February 19, 2013 to January 2, 2018.
Therefore, Defendant D, the heir of the network E, is obligated to pay each of the above loans and damages for delay to the plaintiffs.
B. On June 20, 2019, Defendant D led to the confession of all of the Plaintiffs’ claims on the date of the second pleading of the instant case.
However, since Defendant D had qualified acceptance in the inheritance of the deceased’s property, he is liable only within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased E.
Therefore, Defendant D is obligated to pay interest and delay damages calculated by the agreement of 24% per annum from January 1, 2018 to the date of full payment, which is the interest and delay damages that Plaintiff A seeks from January 1, 2018 to the date of full payment, and the interest and delay damages calculated by the agreement of 24% per annum from January 3, 2018 to the date of full payment, which is the interest and delay damages that Plaintiff B seeks from January 3, 2018 to the date of full payment.
2. The Plaintiff’s claim against Defendant A against Defendant C asserts that, upon the request of the network E, the Plaintiff lent KRW 50 million to Defendant C on February 27, 2017 and KRW 70 million on October 24, 2017 to Defendant C on a monthly interest rate of 2%.
In full view of the evidence and the purport of the entire argument as to No. 4, it is recognized that Defendant C transferred to Defendant C’s account, KRW 50 million on February 27, 2017, and KRW 70 million on October 24, 2017, respectively.
However, the following circumstances, in other words, the plaintiff A may be recognized by adding up the descriptions of No. 3-2 and No. 1 and the overall purport of the arguments.