beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Within the scope of property inherited from the deceased I (J), Defendant C, D, F, G, and H are 4,191, respectively, within the scope of property inherited from the deceased I (J).
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. The Plaintiff entered into a water supply agreement with the I operating K, and supplied Cheongchis to I.
B. However, on November 12, 201, I died. After I’s death, the Plaintiff continued to supply Cheong water to Defendant B and E, who operated “K” by July 21, 2012. Defendant B and E paid to the Plaintiff KRW 3,00,000 and KRW 2,000,000 on March 22, 2012.
C. The price of fruits not received by the Plaintiff is KRW 31,436,500 as of November 12, 201, and KRW 40,168,00 as of July 21, 201.
I’s heir is Defendant B, the spouse of the Defendants, and the rest of the Defendants, who were their children. On October 19, 2015, the Defendants were tried to grant qualified acceptance on the inherited property of I by the Gwangju District Court 2015-Ma1007.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 2, Gap evidence 4-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. According to the above facts of recognition, Defendant C, D, F, G, and H jointly inherited the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Plaintiff upon the death of I. However, the said Defendants were adjudicated on qualified acceptance for the inherited property of I. As such, the Plaintiff is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff an amount equivalent to the respective inheritance shares out of the Plaintiff’s obligation to the Plaintiff within the scope of the inherited property of I.
B. Meanwhile, Defendant B and E also received an adjudication for qualified acceptance with the remaining Defendants, but the above Defendants continued to operate the “K” after I died, and paid part of the price of the Cheongbu to the Plaintiff. This constitutes “where an inheritor conducts a disposal of inherited property,” which is a reason for statutory simple approval under Article 1026 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act, and thus, the qualified acceptance with respect to Defendant B and E is null and void. Thus, Defendant B and E are equivalent to the Plaintiff’s respective inheritance shares among the Plaintiff’s obligations against the Plaintiff.