beta
Text
1. The defendant's payment order for the claim against the plaintiff was based on the payment order for the claim for reimbursement amount No. 2004 tea 480.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On May 17, 2004, the Defendant applied for a payment order against the deceased C (hereinafter “the deceased”) to seek reimbursement of the claim for reimbursement of the amount of reimbursement from the said court on May 17, 2004, the Defendant received the payment order (hereinafter “the instant payment order”) stating that “the deceased shall pay to the Defendant the amount equivalent to KRW 12.5 million per annum from November 29, 2003 to the date of full payment and the expenses for demand procedure by 20% per annum.” The above payment order was served on May 19, 2004 and became final and conclusive on June 3, 2004.
B. On October 24, 2012, the Deceased died, and the Plaintiff, as his spouse, was adjudicated by the said court on October 6, 2015 by filing a report on qualified acceptance with the Gwangju Family Court No. 2015-Ma1434, which was the inheritor.
C. On June 30, 2015, the Defendant applied for grant of succession execution clause against the instant payment order, and received a succession execution clause against the Plaintiff, the deceased’s heir.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. A lawsuit of demurrer for a judgment on the cause of a claim is a claim for exclusion of executive titles itself on the grounds of an objection against the obligation itself, and is not allowed to exclude individual enforcement of specific property. However, determination on the scope of limited liability of an inheritor based on the qualified acceptance with the effect of separating the liability and liability is a matter of substantive law, and is a legitimate ground for objection that can be asserted in a lawsuit of objection against the claim as a matter of substantive law.
On the other hand, even if a qualified acceptance is made, the responsibility is limited to the scope of inherited property, and the debt itself does not extinguish, making a claim for exclusion of executive titles based on qualified acceptance is not allowed, and it is possible to seek exclusion of executive power in the sense that the scope of executive power is limited to inherited property.