1. The plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

2. With respect to the case of application for the suspension of compulsory execution by this Court 2020 Chicago3020, this Court shall

1. Basic facts

A. On March 29, 199, the Defendant lent KRW 13 million to the network D, and the network D died on November 12, 2002.

B. The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the Plaintiffs seeking payment of the amount equivalent to the Plaintiffs’ share of inheritance among the above loans against the network D as Seoul Central District Court Decision 2009Da382458. On June 18, 2010, the above court rendered a judgment that the Plaintiffs would pay to the Defendant the amount calculated at the rate of 30% per annum from June 23, 2001 to the date of full payment (hereinafter “instant judgment”). The above judgment became final and conclusive on July 13, 2010.

At the time, the location of the plaintiffs was unknown, and the copy and original copy of the complaint of the case were served by public notice on the plaintiffs.

C. On August 28, 2009, the Plaintiffs reported the inheritance limited approval on the inheritance of the deceased D’s property as the Suwon Family Court Heading 2009Hun-Ma495, which was accepted on November 26, 2009.

(hereinafter “The qualified acceptance of this case”). [The grounds for recognition] The fact that there is no dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1, 2, 5, and 6, Eul evidence No. 1 (including virtual numbers; hereinafter the same shall apply), and the purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The Plaintiffs asserted that the Plaintiff reported the instant qualified acceptance from August 28, 2009, discovered a demand note on the net D’s obligations and reported the qualified acceptance. The Plaintiffs did not know that the inheritance obligation exceeds inherited property within the period under Article 1019(1) of the Civil Act, without gross negligence, and became aware of such fact at the time of the report of the instant qualified acceptance.

Since there is no inherited property to be responsible for the plaintiffs, compulsory execution based on the judgment of this case against the plaintiffs should be denied.

3. The adjudication on acceptance of the declaration of qualified acceptance by the Family Court is merely a recognition of the requirements for qualified acceptance, not a confirmation of its validity, but a confirmation of the qualified acceptance of inheritance.