beta
Text
1. For the plaintiffs:
A. Defendant D is entitled to 37/1,235 shares of each of the respective real estate listed in the separate sheet.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. G married with Defendant D on October 10, 1961, and her children are Plaintiff A, B, C, Defendant E, and F.
B. On November 29, 2016, G donated 4/10 of each of the instant real estate to Defendant D, and 3/10 of each of the instant real estate to Defendant E and F, while possessing each of the instant real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “each of the instant real estate”), and on November 30, 2016, G filed a procedure for the registration of ownership transfer in accordance with the said gift shares.
C. G died on December 10, 2016, and there was no separate positive inherited or donated property except each of the instant real property at the time when the deceased G died.
[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 2-1 to 3, Gap evidence 3-1 to 3, Gap evidence 4-1 to 3, Gap evidence 5-1 to 5-2, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. As seen earlier, the Plaintiffs’ shortage of legal reserve of inheritance 1) did not exist separate positive or donated property except for each of the instant real estate. Defendant F asserted that there was a claim of KRW 25 million against the network G. However, it is reasonable to view that there was no inheritance liability, since there was no other evidence to acknowledge that there was an inheritance liability, there was no other evidence to prove that there was an inheritance liability. 2) The Plaintiffs’ shortage of legal reserve of inheritance portion is a 1/13=2/13=1/2) of each of the instant real estate, and thus, the Plaintiffs’ shortage of legal reserve of inheritance portion is a 1/13 share of each of the instant real estate.
B. According to the reasoning of the judgment below, it is reasonable to view that each portion of the real estate in this case, among the real estate in this case, falls under the Defendants’ respective shares, as the special profits of each of the Defendants, and that each of the real estate in this case is above.