logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원성남지원 2013.11.19 2013가합4995
대금지급 등
Text

1. The plaintiffs' primary and conjunctive claims are all dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.

Reasons

1. The following facts do not conflict between the parties, or may be acknowledged pursuant to the purport of Gap evidence 1 to Gap evidence 2, Eul evidence 1 and the whole pleadings:

The deceased D had five children between wife E (Death on November 18, 2004) and five children. The Defendant is the male, female, Plaintiff A, and Plaintiff B.

B. As D died on September 8, 1997, the inheritors, including the Plaintiff and the Defendants, made an agreement on the division of inherited property (hereinafter “instant agreement”) with the following contents.

1. Each real estate listed in the separate sheet among inherited property (hereinafter “instant real estate”) shall be owned by the defendant who is the South-North Korean.

2. Of inherited property, KRW 45,000,000 deposited as a general deposit in an agricultural cooperative’s mother cooperative’s group of agricultural cooperatives is to distribute and own KRW 8,750,000 each by wife E, KRW 10,000, KRW 100, female F, Plaintiff A, Nonparty G, son and girls, and Plaintiff B, who is the husband, Nonparty G, and C, respectively.

C. On November 11, 1997, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to the instant real estate according to the agreement division.

2. The plaintiffs' assertion

A. At the time of the division of the agreement, the Defendant agreed that the Defendant, including the Plaintiffs, sell the instant real estate to co-inheritors at the time of the division of agreement on the primary claim, and divide the proceeds from the sale into the inheritance ratio (hereinafter “instant agreement”), which constitutes a father’s subsidiary attached to the agreement on the division of inherited property.

The plaintiffs believe that the defendant would sell the real estate of this case and distribute the proceeds of sale. However, the defendant was excluded from the sale since the completion of the registration of ownership transfer under his name.

On the other hand, the plaintiffs' right to claim under the agreement of this case is an indefinite-term right or conditional right with the effective condition of the sale of the real estate of this case, and as long as the defendant denies its obligation and its considerable period has lapsed, the time limit is limited.

arrow