logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 서울중앙지방법원 2015.07.23 2014가단268354
대여금
Text

1. The defendant shall not exceed 94,795,961 won within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased B and 71,509 out of them.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. Under the credit transaction agreement between the Plaintiff and the Plaintiff as of May 24, 2010 and June 27, 2011, the net C (hereinafter “the deceased”) received a loan from the Plaintiff and the principal and interest of the deceased’s obligations to the Plaintiff as of December 15, 2014 (hereinafter “instant obligations”) are KRW 94,795,961 ( principal, KRW 71,509,561), and the overdue interest rate is 17% per annum.

B. Meanwhile, the Deceased died on April 13, 2014, and his/her heir died on his/her spouse D and children, E, F, G, Defendant A, and D, E, E, F, and G reported the renunciation of inheritance (1391) as of July 7, 2014, and was adjudicated on October 6, 2014.

C. As of March 12, 2015, the Defendant filed a report on the inheritance limited approval with the District Court 2015Hun-Ma460 (No. 2015) and was adjudicated to accept it on May 7, 2015.

[Ground for Recognition: Facts without dispute, Gap 1 through Gap 7-5, purport of the whole pleadings]

2. Determination

A. According to the basic facts, the Defendant was the sole inheritor of the deceased due to the renunciation of inheritance by the wife and some of his children, and succeeded to the obligation of the deceased to the Plaintiff. Therefore, the Defendant is obligated to perform the obligation of this case to the Plaintiff, barring special circumstances.

However, as seen earlier, the defendant filed a report on the limited approval of inheritance and received an adjudication to accept it, so the defendant is obligated to repay the debt of this case to the extent of the property to be acquired by inheritance.

B. As to this, the defendant asserts that since there is no active property inherited from the deceased, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant should be dismissed.

On the other hand, the qualified acceptance of inheritance is not limited to the scope of the existence of the obligation, but merely limited to the liability, so long as the qualified acceptance of inheritance is deemed to exist even in the case of the qualified acceptance of inheritance, the inheritance obligation is entirely succeeded to the obligation of the inheritee within the scope of the inherited property.

arrow