beta
Text
1. All of the plaintiffs' claims are dismissed.
2. The costs of lawsuit are assessed against the plaintiffs.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. On December 29, 1998, the deceased E (hereinafter “the deceased”) completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of a gift made on December 28, 1998 by the Defendant on December 29, 198.
B. On December 30, 1998, the Deceased completed the registration of ownership transfer on the ground of donation from December 26, 1998 with respect to F forest land 5,18 square meters in Incheon, Incheon, Incheon, the Defendant. However, on October 22, 2009, the forest land was divided into real estate listed in attached Tables 1 through 4 (hereinafter “each real estate of this case”) and G forest land 4,211 square meters, and the forest land of this G was expropriated in the State on October 13, 2009.
C. After the Deceased died on August 12, 2012, the Defendant, the Plaintiffs, and Nonparty H jointly inherited the deceased’s property by 1/5 shares, respectively. However, at the time of the Deceased’s death, no particular assets were available to the Deceased.
[Ground of recognition] The non-contentious facts, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 5 (including the number of branch offices in the case of additional numbers), the fact-finding results of the court administration of this court, the result of the order to submit each tax information on the Kimpo-market of this court, and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The plaintiffs asserted that the deceased donated each of the instant real estate to the defendant, and as a result, there was a shortage of legal reserve of inheritance among the plaintiffs who are co-inheritors of the deceased, the defendant asserts that the defendant is liable to return the property equivalent to the legal reserve of inheritance (=1/10 each = 1/5 of legal reserve of inheritance x 1/2 of legal reserve of inheritance x 1/2 of legal reserve of inheritance).
In this regard, the defendant filed the lawsuit in this case after one year from the commencement of inheritance against the deceased even though he knew that the deceased had donated a large number of real estate before the death of the deceased, and thus, the plaintiffs' right to claim the return of forced portions against the defendant has already been extinguished.