Plaintiff

Defendant

October 1, 2008

Suwon District Court Decision 2007Kadan40208 Decided April 10, 2008

1. Revocation of a judgment of the first instance;

2. The plaintiff (appointed)'s claim is dismissed.

3. The costs of the lawsuit are borne by the Plaintiff (Appointed Party).

1. Purport of claim

The compulsory execution based on the executory exemplification of the judgment in the lease deposit case against the defendant (appointed parties, hereinafter referred to as the "Plaintiffs"), 2, and 3, the Suwon District Court Branch 2006 Ghana 115215, is denied.

2. Purport of appeal

The same shall apply to the order.

The Defendant filed a lawsuit against the designated parties, including the Plaintiff, in accordance with the Suwon District Court Decision 2006Gau115215 against the deceased non-party, on December 13, 2006 when the deceased non-party had a claim for the return of the lease deposit against the deceased non-party, and was awarded a favorable judgment on December 13, 2006, and there is no dispute between the parties that became final and conclusive around that time.

The Plaintiff asserts that compulsory execution based on the above final judgment should not be permitted since the designated parties including the Plaintiff had already renounced inheritance. As such, comprehensively taking account of the overall purport of pleading No. 1 (including facts without dispute between the parties), the designated parties, including the Plaintiff, reported to waive inheritance of the deceased non-party’s property before the closing of pleadings. On March 10, 204, the above court’s ruling acceptance of the declaration of renunciation of inheritance and notification of the above judgment around that time can be acknowledged. However, in order for the obligor to raise an objection as to the claim established by the judgment, it cannot be seen that there was an abuse of rights after the final judgment was concluded (Article 44(2) of the Civil Execution Act). Thus, the Plaintiff’s assertion cannot be seen as having been limited to cases where the obligee’s assertion that the above judgment did not have become final and conclusive until the closing of pleadings, and thus, it cannot be deemed that there was an abuse of rights based on the aforementioned final and conclusive judgment, including the obligee’s waiver of inheritance and the content of the judgment.

Therefore, the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed as it is without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance which has different conclusions is unfair, and it shall be revoked, and the plaintiff's claim shall be dismissed and it is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment List of Appointed]

Judge final (Presiding Judge) Professor Jong-nam, Kim Jong-chul