1. The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

2. The plaintiffs' claims expanded in the trial are dismissed.

3. The appeal costs.

1. The reasons for the court’s explanation concerning this case are as follows, except for the addition of the following judgments with respect to the claims extended by the plaintiffs in the trial of the court of first instance, and therefore, they are cited in accordance with the main sentence of Article 420 of the Civil Procedure Act.

2. As to the application for non-performance of compulsory execution against inherited property from the net F

A. Facts of recognition 1) The Defendant filed a claim for reimbursement against the Plaintiffs, who are co-inheritors of the deceased C and the deceased F, a substitute heir of the deceased F (hereinafter “instant judgment”) at 2010da105354 (hereinafter “instant judgment”).

(2) On March 21, 2013, Plaintiff A was issued an original copy of the judgment of this case.

3) On April 2, 2013, the Plaintiffs reported the qualified acceptance with respect to the deceased C as the Changwon District Court Branch Branch 2013-Ma191, and received an adjudication from the said court to accept the report of qualified acceptance. On December 31, 2014, the Plaintiffs received an adjudication to accept the report of qualified acceptance with respect to the networkF by filing a report of qualified acceptance with the Changwon District Court Branch 2014-Ma657, and received an adjudication from the said court on December 31, 2014. [Grounds for recognition] In the absence of any dispute, the Plaintiffs were 1, 2, 4, 6, 7 (including each of the several numbers, and the purport of the entire pleadings and the entire arguments.

B. The plaintiffs' assertion and judgment 1) since they made a qualified acceptance on the deceased F's inherited property, they asserted that the defendant's compulsory execution on their own property is not allowed due to the validity of the above qualified acceptance. 2) Therefore, in full view of the above-mentioned facts and the whole purport of the evidence and arguments as to whether the qualified acceptance on the deceased F's net property is valid, the plaintiff A was issued the original copy of the judgment of this case on March 21, 2013. The judgment of this case stated that the deceased and the plaintiffs died, and that the deceased F was inherited by representation, and the plaintiffs confirmed the contents of the original copy of the judgment of this case, and then on April 2, 2013.