1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant A’s real estate listed in Annex A’s Schedule 2;

B. Defendant B shall set out in attached list No. 3.

1. Claims against Defendant A, B, and C

(a)as shown in the reasons for the attachment of the claim;

B. Ground 1) Defendant A: Judgment on deemed confession (Article 208(3)2 and Article 150(3)2 of the Civil Procedure Act), Defendant B and C: Decision by public notice (Article 208(3)3 of the Civil Procedure Act)

2. The Plaintiff filed a claim against Defendant D, on February 20, 2018, leased real estate specified in attached Table 5 to the network E in KRW 7,948,00, monthly rent of KRW 155,540, and the network E was in arrears with monthly rent of 18 months as of December 3, 2019, and the network E was deceased on February 1, 2020 and succeeded to the network E, may be recognized by comprehensively taking into account the following arguments: (a) there is no dispute between the parties; and (b) the purport of the entire pleadings in the evidence No. 2 and No. 3; and (c) the Plaintiff’s duplicate indicating that the lease contract was terminated on March 30, 2020, which was served on Defendant D on March 30, 202.

Therefore, Defendant D, the heir of the network E, has a duty to deliver to the Plaintiff the real estate stated in attached Table 5.

On the other hand, Defendant D asserts to the effect that since Defendant D received a qualified acceptance report in inheritance of the network E’s property, Defendant D’s obligation should be limited within the scope of inherited property.

On the other hand, the qualified acceptance system separates the inherited property and the inherited property of the inheritor who made the qualified acceptance from the inheritor to the extent of the inherited property, and there is no risk of Defendant D’s repayment with Defendant D’s inherent property in performing the duty of delivery of real estate, which is the inherited property. Thus, Defendant D’s acceptance of the qualified acceptance cannot be deemed as an obstacle to the Plaintiff’s duty of delivery.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim against the defendant D is justified.