logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 수원지방법원 2016.04.21 2014가단536109
유류분 반환 청구의 소
Text

1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.

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

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The deceased E (the deceased on August 25, 2013, hereinafter “the deceased”) has the Plaintiffs, children, Defendant D, F, and G, who are their spouses, as inheritors.

B. Defendant C, Defendant D, F, and G reported inheritance limited approval (U.S. District Court 2013 Madan2471). The said report was accepted on January 7, 2014.

There was no active property in the list of property attached to the above written judgment on qualified acceptance, and it was stated that there was 882,889,448 won as a surety obligation against the National Bank of Korea with a small property as a negative property.

[Reasons for Recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence 1, Eul evidence 3, the purport of the whole pleadings

2. Judgment on the plaintiffs' assertion

A. The Deceased asserted that each of the real estate was donated to the Defendants by purchasing each of the real estate under Defendant D’s name, such as the name of Defendant C, as shown in the attached Table 1 list, as shown in the attached Table 2.

The amount of special profits acquired by Defendant C from the expropriation or disposition of each of the above real estate is KRW 2,724,54,922, and the amount of special profits acquired by Defendant D is KRW 2,764,139,260.

Based on this, Defendant C shall return to the Plaintiffs KRW 485,735,448, and KRW 536,865,496 as legal reserve of inheritance, but the Plaintiffs shall only seek payment of the amount stated in the claim.

B. According to the statement Nos. 5, 6, 9, 11, 4, 15, and 16 (including a provisional parcel number list), Defendant C and D completed the registration of ownership transfer in their respective names on the real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2, as to the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 2 list No. 1, the above Defendant’s age is 24 years, even though it is recognized that the above Defendant’s age was 24 years, and the deceased paid funds necessary for the purchase of the above real estate to the Defendants.

There is no evidence to acknowledge that the deceased purchased the above real estate after paying the price, and then donated it by completing the registration of ownership transfer in the name of the Defendants.

Therefore, the deceased's Schedule 1, 2 is attached to the defendants.

arrow