beta
Text
1. The Defendant may, within the scope of the property inherited from the deceased C, pay back to the Plaintiff KRW 29,893,717 as well as the Plaintiff on January 2016.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiff’s claim 1) lent KRW 50 million to D through its agent on September 17, 2013 to D, but C arbitrarily used KRW 30 million to D, and the remainder of KRW 20 million. C, on May 19, 2014, prepared a certificate of certification that he/she is responsible for the Plaintiff’s above KRW 20 million (No. 2464 of the Dong Office of the General Law for the Law Firm Gyeong-gu, Seoul (No. 2014) and delivered it to the Plaintiff. 2) Since 2013, C operated the Plaintiff’s business by leasing two stories of the building E in Daegu-gu, Daegu, Seoul, which was owned by the Plaintiff, by the Plaintiff. From December 2013 to December 2014, C defaulted KRW 6,743,717.
3) Since the beginning of February 2015, C was admitted to the detention house, and the Plaintiff loaned the amount of KRW 50,000,000 won to C, KRW 350,000,000,000,000 won on April 28, 2015, KRW 31,50,000 on June 29, 2015, and KRW 31,50,000,000 on August 7, 2015. (b) Death C is the Defendant who is a lineal descendant (the sole heir who died on August 14, 2015).
2. The assertion and judgment
A. According to the above facts of recognition as to the cause of the claim, the defendant, as the inheritor of the deceased, is liable to repay the sum of KRW 29,893,717 to the plaintiff as the plaintiff, unless there are special circumstances.
B. 1) The judgment on the qualified acceptance is a defense to the effect that the Defendant qualified acceptance was made by the deceased, and according to the health class and Eul evidence No. 1, the Defendant was recognized as qualified acceptance on December 8, 2015 (the Daegu Family Court case No. 2015 saw-Ma100230). Thus, the Defendant is responsible for the Defendant’s repayment of the deceased’s obligations to the Plaintiff within the scope of the inherited property from the deceased. 2) The Plaintiff already received the “amount equivalent to 20% out of the expected amount of profit from the construction of new G lending on the ground of the deceased’s active property in the instant case on the qualified acceptance trial.”