beta
Text
1. The Defendant’s KRW 2,113,830 to the Plaintiff and KRW 5% per annum from November 17, 2017 to January 10, 2018.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”) died on April 30, 2017, and the deceased’s heir of C, children, D, E, F, and network G (spouse’s spouse, I, J, and K) jointly succeeded to the deceased’s property.
B. On January 28, 198, the Deceased entered into a deposit contract with the Defendant, and at the time of death, the Deceased owned deposit claims of KRW 2,498,164 against the Defendant.
C. On August 31, 2017, the Plaintiff received deposit claims against the Defendant from C, E, F, H, I, J, and K (hereinafter “C, etc.”), and C, etc. notified the Defendant of the said assignment of claims on November 2017.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1-4, Gap evidence 3-1-4, Gap evidence 4-1, and the purport of whole pleadings
2. According to the above facts of recognition, the deposit claim in the name of the deceased is attributed to the co-inheritors at the time of commencing the inheritance with a claim for a separate portion of the claim and at the same time according to their statutory shares. As the deceased died, C/13, the deposit claim in the deceased against the Defendant was inherited by C/13, the Plaintiff, D, E, and F respectively, 6/117, H 6/117, I, J, and K respectively in the share of 4/117.
However, as seen earlier, C et al. transferred the deposit claim inherited in accordance with the statutory inheritance portion to the Plaintiff, and notified the Plaintiff, the Defendant is obligated to pay 2,113,830 won [2,498,164 won (=2,498,164 won x 2/13) of the Plaintiff’s deposit claim to the Plaintiff, the heir of the deceased, such as C et al. (=2,498,164 won x 2/164 won) of the Plaintiff’s claim 1,729,498 won (i.e., 2,498,164 won x 9/13 x 9/13) of the claim transferred by C et al. from November 17, 2017 (the following day of the application for change of the purpose of the instant claim and the cause of the claim) to the Plaintiff on January 10, 2018 (the date of this judgment that the Defendant raised an objection to the existence and scope of the obligation of the performance).
3...