유류분반환
1. The Defendant returned to the Plaintiffs each share of 1/10 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet on January 18, 2017.
The deceased E (hereinafter “the deceased”) owned the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “the instant real estate”) before birth. However, on March 26, 2012, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer on the instant real estate on March 20, 2012.
On January 16, 2016, the Deceased died, and as a co-inheritors, there was a wife F, the Plaintiffs, G, and the Defendant.
At the time, there was no active property and liability for the deceased.
On September 17, 2016, the networkF died on September 17, 2016, and the co-inheritors were children, Plaintiffs, G, and Defendant.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5, and the purport of the entire pleadings, Article 108 of the Civil Act, which applies mutatis mutandis pursuant to Article 1118 of the Civil Act, provides that "in case where there is a person among co-inheritors who has received a gift of property or a testamentary gift from the inheritee, and the gift does not reach his/her own share of inheritance, there is a share of inheritance to the extent of the shortage in property." This is intended to treat the gift property as an advance payment of the share of inheritance in order to ensure fairness among co-inheritors when there is a special beneficiary who received a gift or testamentary gift from the inheritee, and to take this into account in calculating the specific share of inheritance in order to ensure fairness among co-inheritors. Thus, Article 1114 of the Civil Act shall be excluded. Accordingly, where there is a person among co-inheritors who received a special benefit from the pre-sale by the pre-sale donation of property from the inheritee, the right to secured inheritance should be calculated regardless of whether the donation had been transferred one year prior to the commencement of inheritance, etc.