한정승인을 한 상속인의 절차법적 지위

Korean Civil Law allows the heirs to choose whether inherit or not to be inherited, and even if he or she chooses to inherit, he or she can declare qualified acceptance of inheritance, which means the heir will bear the inherited dept but the reimbursement will be made under the limit of the inherited property(Article 1028 Civil Code). In other words, an heir does not repay his debts with his own property. In case the creditor requests payment of the inheritance debt, it is rare for the creditor to make a claim based on the qualified acceptance, so the debtor must protest the qualified acceptance in the lawsuit. In this case the court orders the heir to reimburse the debt only with the inherited property. If this decision is enforced, the execution agency could enforce only the inherited property, and if it is enforced on the original property of the heir, it can be relieved. However, the worst part is that the judge has ordered an unlimited reimbursement, because the defendant failed to make a defense of the qualified acceptance for any reason. At this time, the executive agency can execute without distinction of any property, so it is a matter if the heir can claim relief after the lawsuit. In this regard, the opinion of being unable to receive relief because of the res judicata, and the opinion of being able to receive relief because there is no such power, are asserted and the latter is the majority. However, even if the debt and the liability are different concepts, liabilities are liable to debt, so liability is included in the case of a lawsuit seeking to fulfill the obligation, regardless of whether or not the debtor has made a protest. The conclusion is that the heir can not receive relief from the enforcement process. The opinion of affirming the relief is based on the point of the lack of ability of the debtor, while violating the provisions of the civil law and civil enforcement law, I think that such opinion is not appropriate.