1. All of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Comprehensively taking account of the purport of the entire arguments in Gap evidence Nos. 1 and Eul evidence Nos. 1, the Plaintiff’s claim against the deceased E (hereinafter “the deceased”), the deceased’s death on or around May 21, 2014, and Defendant B’s spouse, Defendant C, and D’s children can be acknowledged.

Therefore, the Defendants inherited the deceased’s obligations due to the death of the deceased.

Unless there are special circumstances, the Defendants are obliged to perform the obligation to pay the price of the goods to the Plaintiff according to the inheritance shares.

However, the Defendants asserted that the deceased did not have an obligation to perform the above obligation by waiving inheritance. Accordingly, according to the evidence No. 1, the Defendants’ assertion pointing this out is with merit, since the Defendants filed an application for renunciation of inheritance with this court on June 9, 2014 and received a trial on June 30, 2014. Thus, the Defendants did not have an heir retroactively to the time of the death of the deceased. Therefore, the Defendants’ assertion pointing this out is with merit.

Therefore, all of the plaintiff's claims are dismissed as it is without merit, and it is so decided as per Disposition.