1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant C is Ansan District Court with respect to the shares of 1/4 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet.

1. Defendant 1 and 2;

(a) Grounds for claims: as shown in the annexed sheet of grounds for claims;

(b) Judgment made by deemed confession (Article 208 (3) 2 of the Civil Procedure Act);

2. According to the statements of Defendant 3 through 9, Defendant 1 through 17, the facts constituting the grounds for the attachment can be acknowledged.

In addition, the Plaintiff may be deemed to have declared its intent to complete the reservation on the instant trade reservation through the instant complaint, which was served on each of the above Defendants on the same day as the written order.

According to this, the above Defendants are obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer as stated in each order to the Plaintiff.

[Qualified acceptance of inheritance is not limited to the existence of an obligation, but merely limited to the scope of liability. Thus, as long as a qualified acceptance of inheritance is recognized as existing even in cases where a qualified acceptance of inheritance is recognized as existing, 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. However, since such obligation has a nature not to enforce compulsory execution against the inheritor's proprietary property, it should be clearly stated in the text of the judgment of performance that it can be executed only within the scope of inherited property (see Supreme Court Decision 2003Da30968, Nov. 14, 2003). However, the claim of this case is a claim for ownership transfer of a specific property, not a substitute, which is an inherited property, and therefore, it does not need to be stated in the text that compulsory execution against the inheritor's proprietary property is not possible.