[이의각하결정에대한재항고][집12(1)민,017]
Acceptance of a qualified acceptance or refusal of inheritance by a creditor during the absence of a waiver of inheritance by the inheritor;
If an inheritor makes a registration of inheritance within the period in which he/she may grant a qualified acceptance or renunciation, it may be recognized as a simple acceptance of inheritance, or because the registration of inheritance cannot be deemed as a disposal act on inherited property. As such, the obligee’s registration of inheritance by subrogation of the inheritor cannot bring about a simple approval, and does not have any influence on the authority to grant a fixed approval or renunciation by subrogation of the inheritor. Therefore, the obligee’s registration of inheritance by subrogation of the obligee cannot be refused.
The term "date when the commencement of inheritance becomes known" means the date when a person becomes aware of the occurrence of the cause of the commencement of inheritance and thereby becomes a successor to it.
Article 997 of the Civil Act, Article 1,005 of the Civil Act, Article 1,019 of the Civil Act
Kim Jin Kim
Seoul High Court Decision 62Ka354 delivered on July 26, 1963, Seoul High Court Decision 62Ka354 delivered on July 26, 1963
The original decision is reversed and the case is remanded to the Panel Division of the Seoul Civil Procedure District Court.
According to Article 97 of the Civil Act, the purport of the reappeal's reappeal's statement of reasons is that the inheritance is commenced due to death. Thus, since the inheritance of an inheritee is succeeded at the same time as the cause of the commencement of inheritance, the waiver of inheritance is merely an act of preserving the inheritor, and the inheritance registration is not an act of disposal, and if the inheritance registration is not permitted due to the exercise of the inheritance right by subrogation of the obligee, it would bring an unreasonable result in preventing the inheritor's fraudulent act. Thus, it is erroneous in the original decision that the heir's application for inheritance registration by subrogation of non-party 1 and 2 is dismissed, as long as the inheritance registration by subrogation of the inheritor's property is not permissible within the period of time of inheritance, it cannot be viewed that the inheritance registration by subrogation of the inheritor's property becomes an act of disposal retroactively against the obligee's will of inheritance. Thus, according to the reasoning of the original decision, it is reasonable to acknowledge that the inheritance registration by subrogation of the inheritor's property becomes an act of disposal by subrogation of inheritance within the period of time of inheritance by the inheritor's.
The judges of the Supreme Court, the two judges of the two judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge)