1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

The defendant shall be within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased B.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. In dispute between the Plaintiff and the deceased B (hereinafter “the deceased”), the deceased’s use of part of the F’s land in Ansan City owned by the Plaintiff without permission, the Plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the deceased for land transfer under the Suwon District Court Sejong District Court Decision 2009Kadan15720, and on March 23, 2010, the said court established a mediation of the following: “The Plaintiff,” on April 23, 2010, “the Plaintiff installed a concrete packaging road (hereinafter “the instant packaging road”) among the 2,290 square meters of G forest land in Ansan-si, and H 249 square meters of H forest, for a mere purpose of passage, for three years from April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2013; the monthly rent is KRW 100,000,0000,000 for each month; and the end of both sides of the deceased is less than three meters of the above packing road (hereinafter “instant mediation”).

B. In accordance with the instant conciliation, the Plaintiff sought performance to the Deceased, but the Deceased did not pay a tea, and did not install a pents gate.

C. On November 13, 2018, the deceased died during the instant lawsuit, and his/her spouse I and his/her children J, D, K, and grandchildren L, M, the Defendant, N,O, and P among them, I, J, D, and K were subject to a judgment of renunciation of inheritance on the grounds that: (a) on February 8, 2018, the L, M, N, N,O, and P were under the jurisdiction of the Suwon District Court under the jurisdiction of 2018 D, L, M, N, N, P, and L were subject to a judgment of renunciation of inheritance under the jurisdiction of the Suwon District Court of Suwon, the Suwon District Court of 2018Ra404, respectively; and (b) the Defendant was subject to the said judgment of qualified acceptance under the jurisdiction of the Republic of Korea 2018Ra404.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap 1, 2, 5, 6 evidence, Eul 4, 6 through 8, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. (1) According to the above facts, upon the instant conciliation, the Defendant is obligated to pay the Plaintiff the rent of KRW 3.6 million for the period from April 1, 2010 to March 31, 2013, and the delay damages therefrom.

(2) As to this, the Defendant had already installed pentgate around March 2010.