1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

1. According to the purport of Gap evidence No. 6 and all pleadings, the fact that the deceased D (hereinafter “the deceased”) operated F in the Busan Jin-gu E market and died on February 14, 2017 can be acknowledged.

2. In the instant case where the Plaintiffs asserted that they received a comprehensive legacy against the Defendant, and sought the payment of loans, the Defendant did not succeed to the deceased’s obligation, and thus, the instant lawsuit is unlawful against the non-qualified person. However, in the lawsuit for performance, the Defendant’s defense is without merit, since the person asserted as the performance obligor by the Plaintiff had the standing to be the Defendant.

3. Judgment on the merits

A. On July 1, 2016, Plaintiff A lent KRW 50 million to the Deceased, and paid KRW 50 million, excluding KRW 10 million as a prior interest, to the Deceased. The unpaid amount was KRW 21.4 million as a result of lending KRW 60 million on November 1, 2016, and paid KRW 50 million as a prior interest, excluding KRW 10 million as a prior interest. The unpaid amount was KRW 45.4 million.

Plaintiff

B on November 4, 2016, on the deceased, lent KRW 30 million to the deceased, and all did not have been repaid.

The above loans owed to the plaintiffs of the deceased, a merchant, are commercial obligations, and the defendant, a joint operator of F, is jointly and severally liable for the above loans pursuant to Article 57 (1) of the Commercial Act, and even if he is not a joint operator, he/she is a transferee of business that belongs to the trade name, and thus, he/she is liable for the above loans in accordance with Article 4

Meanwhile, the defendant, as a comprehensive donee of the deceased, is responsible for the performance of the deceased's obligations pursuant to Article 1078 of the Civil Act.

The defendant is obligated to pay to the plaintiff A KRW 66.8 million (=20 million KRW 45.4 million), and to the plaintiff B KRW 30 million and delay damages for each of the above money.

B. Each statement of Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, which is a book prepared by the plaintiff A himself/herself, is alone.