1. The judgment of the court of first instance is modified as follows.

to the extent of property inherited from the network D.

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The network D entered into a membership agreement with the Plaintiff and used a credit card with the credit card. The overdue interest rate set by the Plaintiff is 23.9% per annum in the event that the payment of the credit card is overdue for at least three months, 24.9% per annum in the case of short-term credit card loans (cash services) and 26.9% per annum in the case of long-term credit card loans (credit card loans).

B. The net D’s obligation under the foregoing contract is the total amount of KRW 5,292,717 as of June 1, 2016 (i.e., a short-term card loan of KRW 1,356,247, a short-term card loan of KRW 1,654,439, a long-term card loan of KRW 1,927,847).

(hereinafter referred to as “instant debt”). C.

D A deceased on June 18, 2016, and the spouse A and B, the inheritor, succeeded to the obligations of this case.

[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, Eul evidence No. 1-1 and 2, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Determination

A. According to the above facts of recognition, the Defendants, as the deceased’s inheritors, succeeded to the instant debt. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendants are obligated to pay the Plaintiff money equivalent to their respective shares of inheritance out of the instant debt.

B. Meanwhile, the Defendants asserted that the deceased D’s inheritance was subject to a qualified acceptance judgment regarding the inheritance. Accordingly, according to the evidence Nos. 1-1 and 2-2 of this case, the Defendants, the deceased D’s heir, filed a qualified acceptance report on the deceased D’s inheritance with Seoul Family Court 2016Ra7844, and received a judgment on January 17, 2017 from the above court. Thus, the Defendants are obliged to pay the Plaintiff money equivalent to each of the instant obligations, only within the scope of the positive property inherited from the deceased D.

Therefore, the defendants' defense is justified.

3. The conclusion is that, within the scope of the property inherited from the network D, Defendant A, the deceased’s spouse, = KRW 2,268,307, = 5,292,717 x 3/7, and less than KRW 3/7, and below.