1. The Defendant: (a) to the extent of the property inherited from the deceased C, KRW 110,800,000, and as to the Plaintiff, February 2019.

1. According to Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 3, and Eul evidence Nos. 1 and 1 of the judgment on the cause of the claim, the plaintiff was awarded a contract for the Gangwon-do E Corporation (Additional Tax No. 190 million won) with D. The defendant's decedent C (the deceased on January 7, 2019; hereinafter "the deceased") guaranteed D's obligation to pay D's construction cost. On July 14, 2017, the deceased agreed to pay 23.8 million won and loan No. 10 million won and loan No. 33.8 billion won to the plaintiff on July 14, 2017, and barring any special circumstance, the defendant is obligated to pay the plaintiff the remainder of the construction cost after deducting the construction cost paid by the plaintiff from the date of payment of the remainder of the agreed amount of KRW 77,380,000,000,000,000,000 after the date of delivery of the complaint.

2. As to the judgment on the Defendant’s assertion, the Defendant asserted that the deceased’s inheritance was qualified as a qualified acceptance, the Defendant reported the qualified acceptance on February 25, 2019 and recognized the fact that the report was accepted under the head of Chuncheon District Court’s 2019-Ma28 on March 5, 2019. Thus, the Defendant is obliged to pay the amount set forth in paragraph (1) within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased.

The plaintiff asserts that although the deceased held 200 shares of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “F”), since the defendant omitted them on the list of property at the time of filing a report on qualified acceptance, the defendant should be deemed to have made a simple approval pursuant to Article 1026(3) of the Civil Act. Accordingly, according to each of the evidence Nos. 9, and No. 1, the deceased held 200 shares of F Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “F”), the fact that the deceased held 10,00 shares per share at the time of death, and that the defendant stated that he did not have active property on the list of