beta
Text
1. Of the judgment of the court of first instance, the part against Plaintiff D that orders payment under the following subparagraphs shall be revoked.
2...
Reasons
1. The part citing the judgment of the court of first instance, excluding the part concerning Plaintiff D, which is to be determined by the court below, is the same as the ground for the judgment of the court of first instance, and thus, refers to the part excluding the remaining part concerning Plaintiff D, which is
2. Determination as to the plaintiff D's claim
A. The deceased’s duty to return the instant real estate, the only real estate of which he/she had bequeathed to the Defendant, and died on June 30, 201, and the Defendant sold the instant real estate at KRW 16550,000 in the price and completed the registration of ownership transfer on June 18, 2013, as recognized in the first instance court’s basic facts cited earlier. Therefore, barring any special circumstance, the Defendant is obligated to return the legal reserve of inheritance in proportion to the sales price of the instant real estate to Plaintiff D, the co-inheritors, according to the legal reserve ratio.
B. As to the defendant's defense, the defendant renounced the plaintiff D's right to claim the return of the legal reserve after the death of the deceased, and the right to claim the return of the legal reserve expired by prescription.
The capacity of intention means mental ability or intelligence that can be reasonably determined on the basis of the meaning or consequence of one’s act based on normal perception and towing, and the existence of capacity of intention must be determined individually in relation to specific juristic acts. Therefore, in particular, in a case where a certain juristic act is given with a special legal meaning or effect that makes it difficult to understand only daily meaning, it is required to understand not only the ordinary meaning of the act, but also the legal meaning or effect in order to recognize capacity of intention.
(see, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2008Da58367, Jan. 15, 2009). According to the evidence No. 4-5, Plaintiff D certified that the instant real estate owned by the deceased was donated to the Defendant on July 2, 2011, and did not raise any objection thereto.