The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

Expenses for appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.

the purport and purpose of the claim;

Comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of the statements and arguments as to the cause of the claim Gap's evidence Nos. 1 and 2, it is recognized that the plaintiff filed a lawsuit against the deceased E (hereinafter "the deceased") seeking payment of damages at the rate of 20% per annum from April 10, 2005 to the date of complete payment, and the judgment was rendered in favor of the court on July 26, 2005. The above judgment became final and conclusive around that time; the deceased died on November 25, 2015, and the Defendants, who were siblingsed, jointly inherited the above judgment debt 1/3 equity.

Unless there are special circumstances, the Defendants are liable to pay each Plaintiff KRW 1,000,000 (=3,000,000 x 1/3) and damages for delay.

In full view of the Defendants’ assertion as to the Defendants’ assertion on the inheritance of the Defendants, the Defendants filed a limited recognition report with Jeju District Court 2019 Jin-Ma 782 on December 31, 2019 and received a judgment on January 15, 2020; Defendant C and D filed a limited recognition report with the same court 2020 Jin-Ma29 on January 13, 2020, and filed a limited recognition report.

1. 30. It is recognized that the report has been tried to accept.

According to the above facts, the defendants are obligated to pay to the plaintiff 1,00,000 won within the scope of the inherited property from each deceased and 20% per annum from April 10, 2005 to the date of full payment.

The above assertion by the defendants is with merit.

As to the Plaintiff’s assertion, the Plaintiff related to Article 1026 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act asserts that the Defendant B withdrawn KRW 20,000 from the deceased’s deposit account on December 27, 2019, prior to the acceptance of the limited approval report, with the consent of Defendant C and D, which is a joint inheritance, and that this constitutes “dispositive act of property in possession” under Article 1026 subparag. 1 of the Civil Act, and thus, the Defendants’ simple approval is deemed as having no validity.

The first instance court, the first instance court.