1. The Plaintiff:

A. As to Defendant A’s KRW 41,420,383 and KRW 22,862,553 among them

B. Defendant among the money under the foregoing paragraph (a).

1. The judgment on the cause of the claim between the plaintiff, the defendant A, and the defendant B is recognized to have been recorded as the cause of the claim in the separate sheet No. 1 through No. 31, and the remaining defendants do not dispute the plaintiff's claim. Thus, the defendants are obligated to pay the amount of money as stated in the claim to the plaintiff.

2. As to the Defendants’ defense, Defendant F claimed that Defendant D, C, E, G, H, and I obtained an inheritance-limited approval, Defendant D, C, C, G, H, and I were subject to an inheritance-limited approval. In full view of the overall purport of the entries and arguments of evidence Nos. 1, B, and B, the J died on March 16, 201, and K died on May 9, 2014. Defendant F, the heir of J, died on July 22, 2016, as the Gwangju Family Court Decision 2016Ra1069 on July 22, 2016, the Defendants D, C, and C were not obligated to obtain an inheritance-limited approval judgment from the Gwangju Family Court as to August 5, 2016, and Defendant G, the heir of K, and the remainder of the Defendants, the heir of K, and the Defendants’ heir of the inheritance-specific Family Court as to the scope of inheritance-specific inheritance-related inheritance-related inheritance-related inheritance-related inheritance-related inheritance-related inheritance-related inheritance-related inheritance-related inheritance-related inheritance-related succession.

Therefore, the above defendants' above assertion is justified.

3. In conclusion, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant F is dismissed as it is without merit. Since the remaining claims against the defendants are with merit, they shall be accepted respectively (However, as stated in the order, the scope of execution shall be the scope of the property inherited from the predecessor). It is so decided as per Disposition.