logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 광주지방법원 순천지원 2018.02.13 2017가단79223
유류분 반환청구
Text

1. The Plaintiff:

A. Defendant B’s KRW 25,353,179 as well as 5% per annum from October 14, 2017 to February 13, 2018.

Reasons

1. Facts of recognition;

A. The Plaintiff, Defendant C, Nonparty E, F, and G were children between the deceased D (hereinafter “the deceased”) and the Defendant B, and the Deceased died on December 10, 2010.

B. The Deceased owned the real estate indicated below (hereinafter referred to as “each of the instant real estate”), and the individual real estate was owned by the Deceased, but the ownership of each of the instant real estate owned by the Deceased was transferred to Defendant B and Defendant C as follows:

On August 31, 2017, at the time of the commencement of the inheritance by the title holder of the registration for real estate indication, the value as of August 31, 201, H 1639㎡ 1639m2 at the time of the commencement of the inheritance (won) on December 13, 201; Defendant B7,03,000 won; 95m2 at the time of the commencement of the inheritance; 1395m2 at the time of the commencement of the inheritance on December 13, 2011; Defendant B; 68,35,000 won on December 13, 201; 8,70,000 won on the aggregate of KRW 168m2 at the time of the commencement of the inheritance; 165m2 at the time of the commencement of the inheritance; 168m2 at the time of the donation of 168m2 at the time of 168m208,50,000 won on the aggregate of KRW 163636.

C. There was no other active and small property at the time of the deceased’s death.

[Reasons for Recognition] A without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 8, the result of the market price appraisal of appraiser L by this court, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the claim for restitution of legal reserve of inheritance

A. The gist of the claim by the parties 1) The Plaintiff’s assertion was that both of the instant real estate were donated to the Defendants one month prior to their death, thereby infringing on the Plaintiff’s legal reserve of inheritance. As such, the Defendants are obliged to return the Plaintiff’s insufficient legal reserve of inheritance as stated in the claim. (2) At the time of the Defendants’ assertion, the Plaintiff managed all the property of the Deceased and the Defendant B at the time of the Plaintiff’s assertion, and the Defendants were aware of the gift to the Defendants, and thus, the deceased was aware of the violation of his legal reserve of inheritance after December 10, 2010. The instant lawsuit was filed thereafter.

arrow