logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1991. 6. 11.자 91스1 결정
[재산상속인상속포기신고][공1991,1925]
Main Issues

The meaning of "the date when the inheritance has been known" under Article 1019 (1) of the Civil Code

Summary of Judgment

"Date of becoming aware of the commencement of inheritance" in Article 1019 (1) of the Civil Code refers to the date when it becomes known that the existence of the cause of the commencement of inheritance has become his heir by means of the knowledge of the occurrence of the existence of the cause of the commencement of inheritance. Therefore, the above consideration period should not run unless the existence of inherited property

[Reference Provisions]

Article 1019(1) of the Civil Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Order 84S17-25 Dated August 23, 1984 (Gong1984, 1723) 86S10 Dated April 22, 1986 (Gong1986, 872) dated August 25, 1988 (Gong1988, 1240)

Re-appellant

Claimant 1 and one other

decedents;

(the network) An decedent;

The order of the court below

Daegu District Court Order 90Du33 dated December 26, 1990

Text

All reappeals are dismissed.

Reasons

The grounds of reappeal are examined.

According to Article 1019 of the Civil Act, a property inheritor may grant simple acceptance, qualified acceptance, or renunciation within three months from the date on which he becomes aware of the commencement of inheritance, and "the date on which he becomes aware of the commencement of inheritance" means the date on which he becomes aware of the occurrence of the fact causing the commencement of inheritance, and thus, it shall be interpreted that the existence of an inherited property or a inherited property liability should be known only when he becomes aware of the existence of the occurrence of the fact causing the commencement of inheritance (see, e.g., Supreme Court Order 84S17-25, Aug. 23, 1984). For the same purport, the claimant shall be deemed to have known that he was aware of the death and his heir on the date on which he died, and then the court below shall determine that the refusal of inheritance of this case reported after three months have passed from the date on which he was aware of the existence of the inherited property obligation is unlawful, and it cannot be accepted to criticize the original decision under the premise

Therefore, all reappeals are dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.

Justices Lee Jae-sung (Presiding Justice)

arrow
심급 사건
-대구지방법원 1990.12.26.자 90브33
본문참조조문