(a) Whether a monetary claim of the inheritee is subject to division of the inherited property, and whether the obligation of the inheritee should be deducted from the value of the inherited property in division of the inherited property;

(b) Whether inheritance tax or special beneficiary paid by an heir should be deducted from the value of inherited property or the value of special benefit property in the division of inherited property;

C. Whether the special benefit received by the special beneficiary among co-inheritors exceeds his/her share of inheritance

(d) Method of appraising the value of inherited property and special benefit-making property and valuation of cash among special benefit-making property;

A. Divided claims or obligations of the inheritee’s deposit claims are legally divided and reverted to, or succeeded to, co-inheritors according to their statutory shares in inheritance at the time of commencement of inheritance. As such, such claims are not included in inherited property subject to division, and obligations in the division of inherited property are not of the nature to be considered, and thus only the amount of net assets after deducting them from the value of inherited property should not be subject to division.

B. According to Article 18(1) of the Inheritance Tax Act, among inherited property, the inheritance tax and defense tax are jointly and severally liable to bear the inheritance tax according to the ratio of possession of each inheritor's property received or to be received among inherited property. Such inheritance tax and defense tax are imposed on the premise that the inheritor succeeds to the property. As such, in the division of inherited property premised on such premise, they are not in the nature to deduct them from the value of inherited property in consideration of inheritance tax and defense tax, and even if a special beneficiary among co-inheritors bears the gift tax and defense tax on special-profit property, such gift tax and defense tax are stipulated to be deducted from the amount of inheritance tax to be paid by the heir. Thus, this does

C. Even if the special benefits received by the special beneficiary exceeds his/her share of inheritance, there is no provision in the Civil Act stipulating the duty of return for the excess portion, and in cases where there is a large amount of special beneficiary, other co-inheritors are excluded from inheritance according to the legal reserve of inheritance system. Therefore, such duty of return should not be deemed to exist.

(d) Appraisal of the value of inherited property and special proceeds property shall be made at the market price as at the time of the commencement of consultation, and the appraised value at the time of commencement of the inheritance of cash among special proceeds shall be made by taking into account the consumer price index into

(b)Article 1013 of the Civil Code, Article 18 of the Inheritance Tax Act, Article 1008, Article 1115 of the Civil Code;

Appellant, Appellant et al.

Defendant, appellant and six others

Seoul Family Court (87div747518) of the first instance court

The original adjudication shall be modified as follows:

1. Each inherited property listed in the separate sheet No. 1 shall be attached to an auction and the amount obtained by deducting the expenses for the auction procedure from the auction proceeds shall be divided to the applicants and the respondent according to each specific share of inheritance in the separate sheet No. 4;

2. The costs of the lawsuit shall be nine-minutes of all the first and second instances, and such two-minutes of all the Claimants, and the remainder shall be borne by the Respondents.

Each inherited property and KRW 109,33,455 as stated in the attached Table 1 list shall be divided in cash or by auction, and the costs of the trial shall be borne by the respondent.

The respondent 1: The respondent shall cancel the part against the respondent 1 in the original adjudication, and the claim of the appellant corresponding to that part shall be dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by all the petitioners in the first and second instances.

A respondent 2, 3, 4, or 5: The original adjudication shall be revoked.

The claimant's claim is dismissed.

Litigation costs shall be borne by all the petitioners in the first and second instances.

1. The inheritor and the statutory share in inheritance;

In full view of the purport of the argument in the statement of No. 1, which is not disputed in the establishment of the plaintiff 1, the non-party 1, who married with the non-party 2 on February 3, 1937 and died of the non-party 2 on May 30, 1959, married with the defendant Hong, the defendant 6, and the non-party 2, who got married with the defendant 2 on May 30, 1959, and entered into an internal relationship with the non-party 3, and died on February 27, 1987, the plaintiff 1 was the successor of Australia as the non-party 1 died, and the defendant 4,7 was the defendant as of the death of the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 1 was the non-party 4, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 6, the defendant's non-party 2, the defendant's non-party 3, the non-party 3, the non-party 1, and the heir 4.

2. The scope of inherited property to be divided and the value of such property as at the time of commencement of the inheritance shall not be disputed; evidence Nos. 2-1 through 9; evidence No. 3-1 through 22; evidence No. 4-1 through 4; evidence No. 5-1 through 5, 8 through 33; 34; 35, 36, 37; 6-2 through 4; 1, and 6 are not disputed between the claimant and the other parties; the value of the real property as at the time of the commencement of inheritance as at the time of the above provisional registration No. 68; the value of the real property as at the time of the commencement of inheritance to be recorded in the separate registration No. 1; the value of the real property as at the time of the commencement of inheritance as at the time of the above entry in the separate registration No. 68; the value of the real property as at the time of the commencement of inheritance and the remaining value of the witness No. 1 to be recorded in the separate list No. 72; and the purport of title No. 6.

The claimant's legal representative asserts that the above separate deposit amount of 45,067,745 won should also be included in the inherited property subject to division at the time of the death of the deceased (the above separate deposit amount of 10,000 won). Since this claim against the new bank of the deceased should be legally divided and reverted to the co-inheritors at the same time of the commencement of inheritance, the above argument is groundless, and the respondent 1, who is one of the co-inheritors, received the above separate deposit amount of 20,000 won (the above separate deposit amount of 16,000 won) after the above death of the deceased (the above separate deposit amount of 10,000 won, 20,000 won, 16,000 won, 16,000 won, 18,000 won, 16,000 won, 16,000 won, 2,000 won, 16,000 won, 18,0000).

The defendant 1's attorney and the defendant 2, 3, 4, and 5's attorney (hereinafter the defendant 2's attorney) were jointly and severally guaranteed by the defendant 1's representative and the defendant 2, 3, 4, and 5's attorney at the time of the death of the above deceased, and (2) as to the real estate, joint collateral mortgage amounting to 450,000 won was established at the time of the death of the above deceased, and the above defendant 215,304,109 won as of April 25, 198, as to the secured obligation of the above deceased, the above defendant 2,3,60,600 won and the above defendant 1's share in the inherited property should not be considered as 40,50,000 won and the remaining co-inheritors's share in the inherited property, and thus, the defendant's share in the inherited property should not be considered as 50,000 won and the remaining co-inheritors's share in the inherited property.

The legal representative of the appellee 1 and the legal representative of the appellee 2 shall be deducted from the value of the inherited property in consideration of the inherited property subject to division, in which both the appellant and the appellee are co-inheritors, and the inheritance tax and defense tax to be imposed as a result of the inheritance of the property shall be deducted from the value of the inherited property. Thus, according to Article 18 of the Inheritance Tax Act, the inheritance tax is jointly and severally liable for the inheritance tax according to the ratio of possession of the property each inheritor received or is to receive from among the inherited property. Such inheritance tax and defense tax are imposed on the premise that the heir succeeds the property, and such division of inherited property is not of the nature that the inheritance tax and defense

3. The value of special profits and the commencement of inheritance;

The evidence No. 6-1 (Appraisal Report), evidence No. 4-1, evidence No. 5-1, evidence No. 4-2, evidence No. 5-1, evidence No. 5-1, evidence No. 6-5, evidence No. 6-1, and evidence No. 6-5, and the other defendants except the appellant and defendant No. 6, 7 are public documents, and the authenticity is presumed to have been established between the appellant and defendant No. 9 (Resolution of Inheritance Tax Decision), evidence No. 2 (Monthly Contract), evidence No. 3, evidence No. 4 (Written Contract), evidence No. 19-1, No. 2, and No. 19-2, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 1, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 1, evidence No. 7, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 1, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 7, evidence No. 1, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 2, evidence No. 7, evidence No. 1, evidence No. 7, evidence No. 1, evidence No. 2, evidence.

(1) On June 29, 1974, the Plaintiff 1: (a) received four parcels of land at 689 square meters at 689 square meters from Dobong-gu Seoul (Change omitted) on which they were admitted to the Korea National Housing Corporation; and (b) received KRW 179,470,350 as compensation on September 17, 1986.

(2) Claimant 2; 5,000,000 in cash on September 1986

(3) The respondent 1; (a) 150,000,000 won in cash as of 1981

(b) Cash of 100,000,000 won; and

(c) Cash of 120,380,400 won; and

(Other, around 1986, an amount equivalent to 30,000,000 won in total at the market price at the time of 1 Dong-dong, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul, Seoul, and the above 1 Dong-dong, the above 30,000,000 won in total at the time of the above 1 Dong-dong, but it shall not be deemed as special profits, since it has been acquired as 30,00,000 won or more in total as the

(4) On August 1983, 1983, the respondent 3; 1134.6 square meters and 542.8 square meters of the above (number omitted) were donated to Dongdaemun-gu Seoul, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul; and the value at the time of commencement of the inheritance was 3,04,481,000 won in total.

(5) respondent 5; (a) 104,000,000 in cash on June 1986

B. On March 1983, 158.7 square meters, 43 square meters, and 130,000 won as at the time of the commencement of inheritance, the value at the time of the commencement of inheritance, which was donated to the Seoul Dongdaemun-dong (number omitted), Dongdaemun-gu Seoul (158.7 square meters), and the 486,697,120 square meters, and the 130,000,000 won as at the time of donation, are exempted from liability. Thus, the deduction is made to the sum KRW 486,697,120.

(6) respondent 6; 150,000,000 in cash, 1969

(7) respondent 7; 130,000,000 in cash, 1968

Furthermore, as to the appraised value at the time of commencement of the inheritance of cash donation among the above special profits, there is no dispute over the establishment between the respondent and the respondent, and between the claimant and the respondent and the respondent 6, 7, the annual index of the consumer price in Korea is as shown in the attached Form 2. Based on the following: (a) the annual index of the consumer price in Korea is as listed in the attached Table 2; and (b) the above cash donation is appraised as at the time of commencement of the inheritance (as seen earlier, the claimant 1 shall be deemed to have received the compensation as a donation of cash at the time of the commencement of the inheritance, but it shall be deemed to have received the compensation as at the time of the commencement of the inheritance (as seen earlier, the claimant 1 shall be deemed to have received the cash donation at the time of the receipt of the compensation).

Therefore, the value of special benefits received by inheritors at the time of commencement of inheritance is as follows:

1. Appellant 1; gold 180,998,988

2. Appellant 2; gold 5,042,587 won.

3. A respondent 1; gold 399,612,680 won.

4. A respondent 3; 3,044,481,00 won in gold.

5. A respondent 5; gold 591,948,760 won (486,697,120 +150,251,640)

6. respondent 6; gold 1,050,454,474 won.

7. respondent 7; gold 1,058,788,080 won;

Total amount of 6,331,326,569 won

The claimant's legal representative was donated KRW 130,00,00 with a marriage settlement deposit, and the defendant 2 also donated the defendant 1,30,000,00 won to the land of six parcels, other than the Gyeonggi-gu 1, 235-1, Dongdaemun-gu, Seoul Cheongsan apartment (Dong, Dong, omitted), and Seoul Offset Dong (Seng-si omitted), and the land of the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 2, and the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 2, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 2, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 2, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 2, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 2, the non-party 1, the non-party 1, the non-party 2.

The defendant 2's attorney argued that the special profit-making property received by the defendant 3 should not be included in the special profit-making property on August 1983, 1983, which was one year prior to the commencement date of the inheritance. However, according to Article 1008 of the Civil Code of Korea, since the time of donation was restricted with respect to the donation added to the value of inherited property with special profit-making property, the above argument is groundless. Second, as the defendant 3 bears the burden of gift tax and defense tax as mentioned above, it shall be deducted from the value of special profit. However, the above gift tax and defense tax are not deducted from the value of special profit (Article 18 (3) of the Inheritance Tax Act provides that the above gift tax will be deducted from the amount of inheritance tax to be paid by each person). Third, since the defendant 2 contributed to the formation of inherited property by the deceased's spouse, it is not reasonable to consider the amount of the contributory portion in the process of establishing the inherited property (Article 1001 of the Civil Code).3200.

4. Calculation of a specific share of inheritance;

As seen earlier, the inherited property value subject to division of inherited property at the time of the commencement of the inheritance becomes KRW 5,441,287,880 in total, and the value of special profits is KRW 6,331,326,569 in total, and the sum of these values is KRW 11,772,614,449 in total, deemed inherited property ($ 5,441,287,80 in + KRW 6,331,326,569 in total), so it is necessary to calculate the specific share of inheritance of the inheritors based on this.

In respect of such deemed inherited property, the share of inheritance of the heir multiplied by their respective statutory shares in inheritance shall:

(1) Claimant 1; 11,772,614,449 x 4/34 =1,385,013,464 ;

(2) Claimant 2; 11,772,614,449 x 4/34 =1,385,013,464 ;

(3) respondent 1; 11,772,614,49 won x 6/34=2,077,520,196 won;

(4) respondent 2; 11,772,614,49 won x 6/34 =2,077,520,196 won;

(5) respondent 3; 11,772, 614,49 won x 4/34 =1,385,013,464 won;

(6) respondent 4; 11,772,614,49 won x 1/34=34-346,253,366 won;

(7) respondent 5; 11,772, 614,49 won x 4/34 =1,385,013,464 won;

(8) respondent 6; 11,772, 614,49 won x 4/34 =1,385,013,464 won;

(9) respondent 7; 11,772,614,49 won x 1/34-346,253,366 won x 11/772,614,449 won x 1/346,253,366

(1) Claimant 1; 1,385,013,464 won-180,998,988 won =1,204,014,476 won;

(2) Claimant 2; 1,385,013,464 won-5,042,587 won =1,379,970,877 won

(3) respondent 1; 2,077,520,196-39,612,680 won =1,67,907,516 won;

(4) respondent 2; 2,077,520,196

(5) respondent 3; 1,385,013,464-3,04,481,00 won =-1,659,470,536 won;

(6) respondent 4; 346,253,366 won;

(7) respondent 5; 1,385,013,464 won-591,948,760 won =793,064,704 won;

(8) respondent 6; 1,385,013,464 won-1,050,454,474 won =34,58,90 won;

(9) The respondent 7; 346,253,366-1,058,788,080 won =-712,534,714 won; as seen above, the defendant 3 and 7 merely constitute special beneficiaries exceeding the above share of inheritance, but there is no provision in the Civil Act that provides for the duty to return the excess amount, and in the case where there is a large amount of special beneficiary, there is no special beneficiary, it is reasonable to deem that other co-inheritors do not have the duty to return because there is no specific share of inheritance (0). Accordingly, the specific share of inheritance between the claimant and the rest is the specific share of inheritance, and the specific share of inheritance between the claimant and the rest are the total sum of the inheritance share of each specific share of each specific share of inheritance, 7,13,290,712,534,767,79,779,747,79,757,796,79,757,79,767,37,747,757,7,7947,7

5. Method of dividing the inherited property.

According to the purport of the pleading, although the claimant and the respondent consulted several times on the division of the above inherited property, they did not reach an agreement on the value of special proceeds and the value of inherited property donated by the deceased in the event of the existence of the above deceased. Meanwhile, the inherited property subject to division mentioned above is the right to all real property, which is a right to the whole real property, and is not possible to divide it in kind due to the diversity of its nature and form and the conflict of interests between the inheritors, and it is reasonable to divide it by

6. If so, it is reasonable to divide the amount obtained by deducting the auction procedure costs from the auction proceeds by being attached to each real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 1, which is the inherited property subject to division, from the auction proceeds, to the claimant and the respondent according to each corresponding share of inheritance as stated in the separate sheet No. 4. Since the original judgment is unfair in conclusion, it is to be modified as stated in Paragraph 1. Since the original judgment is unfair as it is unfair, and the costs of lawsuit shall be divided as stated in the separate sheet No. 1, and the remainder shall be borne by the respondent and the respondent

[Attachment List omitted]

Judges final (Presiding Judge) Kim Nam-taen-su