1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant A’s KRW 63,432,426 and KRW 36,462,625 among them:

B. Defendant B is Defendant A.

In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in the statement Nos. 1 through 14, the facts constituting the grounds for the claim can be acknowledged. Therefore, the Defendants are obliged to pay the money indicated in the text.

Defendant C, D, and E, as the heir of the deceased F, received a declaration of the limited acceptance of inheritance from the court, and the Plaintiff’s assertion is without merit. Thus, the qualified acceptance of inheritance is merely limited not to limit the existence of the obligation, but to limit the scope of the liability. Thus, inasmuch as the qualified acceptance of inheritance is recognized even if there is no inherited property or the inherited property is insufficient to repay the inherited obligation, the court shall render a judgment on the performance of the entire inherited obligation. However, inasmuch as the heir’s obligation cannot be subject to compulsory execution with respect to the inherent property of the heir, it must specify the purport that it can be executed only within the scope of the inherited property (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Da30968, Nov. 14, 2003). Accordingly, in this case where the Plaintiff sought payment from the above Defendants within the scope of inherited property, the above Defendants’ assertion is without merit.