beta
Text
1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.
Reasons
1. The gist of the Plaintiff’s assertion and the Defendant are children of the deceased deceased deceased deceased deceased net C on February 20, 2015, and the Plaintiff’s statutory inheritance portion is 2/9.
At the time of the deceased C’s death, each real estate listed in the separate sheet was included in the inherited property. At around September 16, 1999, the deceased C donated 495/1,474 shares out of the real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the separate sheet to D, who is another child, and on August 22, 2014, the real estate listed in paragraph (1) of the same list was bequeathed to the Defendant and bequeathed to the Defendant each of the real estate listed in paragraphs (3) and (4) of the same list on the same day.
However, since it is apparent that the legacy made to the Defendant by the deceased C infringes on the Plaintiff’s legal reserve of inheritance (1/9), the Defendant is obligated to return KRW 11,816,070,070, which is the infringed amount of the Plaintiff’s legal reserve of inheritance. The specific method should be the method of performing the registration procedure for transfer of ownership as to each share stated in the purport of the claim divided according to the ratio of each property value at the time of inheritance of each real estate listed in the attached list 1,2,5,6
2. The person with the right to the legal reserve of inheritance may claim the return of the shortage in cases where there are shortages in the legal reserve of inheritance due to the gift or testamentary gift of the inheritee, and when there are several co-inheritors who received the gift or testamentary gift in the return of the legal reserve of inheritance, the person with the right to the legal reserve of inheritance may claim the return of the shortage in proportion to the ratio of the value of the gift exceeding the proper legal reserve of inheritance of the inheritor.
(1) In light of the above legal principles, the Plaintiff’s forced reserve of inheritance and the Defendant’s value of the property donated or bequeathed exceeds his own inherent forced reserve of inheritance among co-inheritors (see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2006Da46346, Nov. 10, 2006).