beta
Text
1. On October 20, 2016, the Defendant returned to the Plaintiffs each share of 1/6 of the real estate listed in the separate sheet.
Reasons
1. Facts of recognition;
A. The Plaintiffs are children of E (the Deceased in the following) who died on August 28, 2016, and the Defendant is a de facto spouse of the Deceased.
B. On November 4, 1988, the Deceased completed the registration of ownership transfer due to sale on May 31, 1988, as Seoul Northern District Court No. 177638, which received on the same day, with respect to the real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter referred to as the instant real estate).
C. On May 18, 2016, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer based on sale on April 20, 2016, the receipt of the Seoul Northern District Court’s Northern Branch Registry No. 41061 on the same day.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, entry of Gap evidence 1 to 11, purport of the whole pleadings
2. Determination
A. In full view of the following circumstances acknowledged by the facts of determination as to the cause of the claim and the evidence mentioned above, (i) the Defendant did not have the purchase price paid to the Deceased, and (ii) the Defendant asserts that he would have recovered the real estate trusted to the Deceased, and (iii) the Defendant’s assertion on title trust was not accepted, it is reasonable to view that the deceased presumed to be the previous owner by the registry was a donation of the real estate
The gift of the instant real estate, the sole inherited property, infringes on the legal reserve of inheritance of the Plaintiffs, who are the deceased. Thus, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to implement the registration procedure for ownership transfer on October 20, 2016 for each of the instant real estate (i.e., statutory inheritance portion 1/3 x 1/2) shares among the instant real estate to the Plaintiffs, barring any special circumstance.
B. The defendant's assertion asserts that the real estate of this case was registered in title trust with the deceased.
However, the statement No. 7 alone reversed the presumption of transfer of ownership in the deceased's name and the defendant's assertion that a title trust agreement existed between the defendant and the deceased.