logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1979. 6. 26. 선고 79다720 판결
[소유권이전등기말소][공1979.10.1.(617),12095]
Main Issues

(a) Inheritance ranking in cases where there is no male to inherit the head of family under the former customary law;

(b) Whether a woman having the right to inheritance under the former common law has lost his/her right to inheritance in cases where he/she actually remarried;

Summary of Judgment

A. In a case where the head of a family dies after the death of the married head of a family and there is no male who is to inherit the head of the family, it is our custom to temporarily inherit the head of a family and to inherit the property until the time when the lineal ascendant, spouse or lineal descendant of the deceased head of the family or the deceased head of the deceased head of the family is appointed in the order of respect.

B. Even if a female who has inheritance rights under the former customary law actually remarrieds before the inheritance begins, the status of the family heir shall not be lost unless the family head has left his family register at the time of the death of the family head.

[Reference Provisions]

Articles 984 and 980 of the Civil Act

Reference Cases

Supreme Court Decision 68Da1587 Decided February 4, 1969, 71Da786 Decided June 22, 1971, Supreme Court Decision 69Da1954 Decided January 27, 1970

Plaintiff-Appellee

Plaintiff

Plaintiff-Supplementary Intervenor-Appellee

[Defendant-Appellant] Plaintiff 1 et al., Counsel for defendant-appellant

Defendant-Appellant

Defendant 1 and three others

original decision

Gwangju High Court Decision 78Na494 delivered on March 16, 200

Text

All appeals are dismissed.

The costs of appeal shall be assessed against the defendants.

Reasons

The defendants' grounds of appeal are examined.

No. 1, the facts of the lower judgment found that the Nonparty, who had been the owner of the instant real estate, had three children, but the Nonparty, who had been the owner of the instant real estate, died on September 14, 201, followed by the death of 42.9.14, there was a difference between the Plaintiff’s Intervenor, who was the wife of the deceased head, and his grandchildren, and three South and North Korea.

As such, in the case where the Australia died after the death of the married head of family and there is no male who will inherit the head of family, it is our custom that the lineal ascendant, spouse or lineal descendant of the deceased head of family or the deceased head of the deceased head of family will temporarily inherit the head of family and inherit the property of the deceased head of family until the new head of family is appointed in the order of respect (see Supreme Court Decision 71Da786, Jun. 22, 71). Thus, the court below held that the intervenor joining the plaintiff in this case as a legitimate heir of the non-party is just in the judgment of the court below, and as alleged by the defendants, the non-party could not lose the status of the heir of the head of family, unless the non-party was found to have disappeared from the family register of the deceased head of family, even if the intervenor joining the deceased in fact before the commencement of the inheritance, as long as the non-party had never left the family register of the deceased head of family (see Supreme Court Decision 69Da195

In addition, it cannot be said that the transfer of the real estate in this case inherited by the Plaintiff’s Intervenor constitutes a gift with an burden, as the Plaintiff knew that the Plaintiff had the right to inheritance in Australia.

No issue may be employed.

Point 2, we affirm and accept the measures that recognized the facts in the judgment based on the evidence stated in the original judgment, and the argument that it is a tree is returned to the court below's exclusive exercise of authority to the judge, so it is difficult to employ it as long as there is no way to do so and there is no illegality

All arguments are without merit, and are so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices.

Justices Lee Il-young (Presiding Justice)

arrow
참조조문