1. The Defendant’s order for the executory payment of the borrowed money case with the Suwon District Court in relation to the deceased C, 2016 tea146.

1. Basic facts

A. On April 14, 2016, the Defendant filed an application with Suwon District Court for a payment order against the deceased’s father C (hereinafter “the deceased”), demanding payment of the borrowed money as the Plaintiff’s father’s branch branch branch branch office 2016 tea146, and the Defendant received the payment order (hereinafter “instant payment order”) from the said court to the effect that “the deceased would pay to the Defendant KRW 62,643,287 and any delay damages for KRW 21,00,000 among them,” and the instant payment order against the deceased was finalized on May 5, 2016.

B. Upon the deceased’s death on April 2, 2017, the Defendant received a seizure and collection order on October 10, 2018, with respect to the instant payment order, based on the inheritance share among the deceased’s successors, including the Plaintiff, on November 16, 2018, pursuant to Seoul Western District Court Decision 2018TTTT10434, with respect to the claims in the separate sheet against the third debtor (hereinafter “the instant claim”), and issued a seizure and collection order with respect to the claims in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant claim”).

(hereinafter “instant compulsory execution”). C.

On October 16, 2018, the Plaintiff, D, E, F, and G, who are co-inheritorss of the deceased, served with the above succession execution clause. On December 3, 2018, Seoul Family Court Decision 2018 Madan9209, which was active property, filed a report on special fixed approval accompanied by the list of inherited property, stating the Defendant’s claim, as 929 square meters of HH forests and fields, and small property. On July 5, 2018, the said court accepted the said report (hereinafter “instant special approval”).

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 7, purport of the whole pleadings

2. According to the above facts of determination as to the cause of the claim, according to the special approval of this case, the plaintiff is responsible for the repayment of the inheritance obligation within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased, and it is reasonable to view the claim of this case as the plaintiff's proprietary property. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the execution of this case against the plaintiff's claim of this case shall be inherited.