beta
Text
1. The Defendant shall, within the scope of the property inherited by the deceased C from the deceased D, KRW 190,00,000 to the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. On December 7, 1996, the Plaintiff loaned 190 million won to D with interest rate of 3% per month and by March 6, 1997.
B. On January 11, 2008, the judgment of the court below that "D shall pay to the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 190 million and the amount calculated at the rate of 25% per annum from December 7, 2006 to the date of full payment" (Seoul Southern District Court 2007Gahap17667), and the above judgment became final and conclusive on February 6, 2008.
C. Meanwhile, the D died on August 4, 201, and the Defendant, E, and F, who is a child, renounced their respective inheritance, and the wife C was determined by the Seoul Family Court Decision 2019Mo8206, supra.
After that, C died on June 16, 2014, and the defendant inherited C solely by giving up his or her respective inheritance among his or her children.
[Ground of recognition] Evidence Nos. 3 and 4, and the purport of the whole pleading
2. The Plaintiff asserts that, as the Defendant succeeded to C, the Plaintiff is obligated to repay the loan obligations based on the above judgment.
However, according to the above facts, C succeeded to the loan obligation based on the above final judgment within the scope of the property inherited from D, and the defendant succeeded to the loan obligation based on the above final judgment within the scope of the property inherited from C. Thus, the plaintiff's above assertion is justified only for the part seeking payment within the scope of the property inherited from D among the above loan obligation, and there is no reason for the part seeking payment exceeding the scope of the above inherited property.
Therefore, within the scope of the property inherited from the network C, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the amount of KRW 190 million with respect to the above loan and damages for delay calculated by the rate of 25% per annum from December 7, 2006 to the date of full payment.
3. Thus, the plaintiff's claim is justified within the scope of the above recognition.