1. The Plaintiff:

A. As regards A, 92,403,574 won and 91,582,397 won among them:

B. Defendant C and D are above.

(b).

1. Indication of the cause of the claim concerning the claim against the defendant A: The same shall apply to the description of the changed cause of the claim;

Judgment on deemed confession: Article 208(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act

2. Determination as to each claim against Defendant C and D

A. In light of the fact that there is no dispute over the cause of the claim, the entries in Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 8, and the overall purport of the arguments, all facts of the changed cause of the claim are recognized, and as such, Gap Co., Ltd. and Gap Co., Ltd., for KRW 92,403,574 and KRW 91,582,397, Defendant C and D are above.

From September 8, 2015 to November 2, 2015, which is the last delivery date of the copy of the complaint of this case, the Defendant Company A, jointly and severally with E, shall be liable to pay 46,109,379 won and 45,698,971 won, respectively, within the scope of property inherited from E within the scope of property inherited from the Defendant Company A, with 12% per annum in accordance with the agreement and 15% per annum in accordance with the Act on Special Cases concerning the Promotion, etc. of Legal Proceedings, from the next day to the day of full payment.

B. Defendant C and D sought dismissal of the instant claim on the ground that the report on qualified acceptance was accepted, but Defendant C and D modified the purport of the claim by reflecting the fact that the Plaintiff received the report on qualified acceptance, thereby bearing obligations within the scope of the inherited property from E. As such, there is no reason to dismiss the Plaintiff’s claim.

Therefore, Defendant C and D’s assertion is without merit.

3. Conclusion, the plaintiff's claim of this case is justified.