beta
Text
1. The Plaintiff:
A. Defendant B Co., Ltd.: (a) from March 11, 2019, 155,092,612 won and 124,154,961 won among them.
Reasons
1. Claim against Defendant B, and G
A. The part concerning the above Defendants among the reasons for the attachment of the claim and the amended reasons for the claim are as stated in the judgment below.
(b) Service by public notice based on recognition (Article 208 (3) 3 of the Civil Procedure Act);
2. There is no clear dispute between the Plaintiff and the said Defendants as to each of the grounds for the change in the attached list of claims against the remaining Defendants.
According to this, the above Defendants are the inheritors of the deceased L (hereinafter “the deceased”) who are obligated to perform the deceased’s obligations to the Plaintiff according to their shares of inheritance.
On the other hand, the Defendants asserted to the effect that they cannot respond to the Plaintiff’s claim because they were subject to a qualified acceptance trial on the deceased’s inheritance.
However, the qualified acceptance of inheritance is not limited to the existence of an obligation, but merely limited to the scope of liability, so long as the qualified acceptance of inheritance is recognized even in cases where the qualified acceptance of inheritance is recognized, the court shall render a judgment to fully perform the inheritance obligation even if there is no inherited property or the inherited property is insufficient to repay the inherited property. Provided, That in order to restrict the executory power, the court must clearly state the purport that the obligation can be executed only within the scope of the inherited property in the text of the judgment of performance, in order to limit the executory power.
(2) In light of the above legal principles and the purport that the Plaintiff, within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased, sought performance of the inheritance obligation according to the inherited portion, to the said Defendants, the above assertion is without merit.
If so, the plaintiff's claim is accepted on the grounds of all.