1. To the extent of the property inherited from the network D, the Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A: 14,452,941 won and 12,857.

1. In full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each of the evidence Nos. 1 through 3 (including each number) as to the Plaintiff’s claim, it can be acknowledged that the Defendants obtained the inheritance limited recognition as the Daejeon District Court 2015Radan49.

If so, within the scope of the property inherited from the network D, Defendant A is obligated to pay to the Plaintiff 14,452,941 won (33,723,531 won x 3/7, and less than won x 3/7,000 won x 3/7) and to pay damages for delay calculated at the rate of 15% per annum from October 21, 2015, which is the day following the day of calculating the last damages for delay to the day of full payment to the day of full payment from October 21, 2015 to the day of full payment, Defendant B and C are liable to pay damages for delay at the rate of 15% per annum from the balance of the loan principal to 8,571,428 won (30,00,000 x 2/7).

2. The defendants' assertion that the qualified acceptance was made by attaching the list of inherited property to positive property at the time of the inheritance limited acceptance, and therefore, they are liable as inheritor only within the scope of the above list of inherited property, and since they deposited the list amount thereafter, they cannot comply with the plaintiff's claim. However, even if the defendants received the qualified acceptance by attaching the list of positive property inherited from the network D at the time of the inheritance limited acceptance, the defendants' assertion that even if they received the qualified acceptance by attaching the list of positive property inherited from the network D at the time of the inheritance limited approval, it is not confirmed as the list of inherited property attached to the letter of the above inheritance limited acceptance, and there is no evidence that the defendants deposited the above amount

However, after the conclusion of the argument in this case, the defendants make a relative non-defensive deposit of active properties asserted against the creditors of the network D including the plaintiff after the conclusion of the argument in this case.