logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 창원지방법원 2016.09.06 2016가단106370
소유권이전등기
Text

1. The plaintiff's claim is dismissed.

2. The costs of lawsuit shall be borne by the Plaintiff.

Reasons

1. Basic facts

A. The Plaintiff is the de facto spouse of the deceased C (Death on November 15, 2006), and the Defendant is the spouse of the deceased C-WD (Death on September 29, 2015) born between the deceased C and the Plaintiff.

B. On Aug. 8, 2006, the network C decided to donate real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) to the network D, and completed the registration of ownership transfer on the 10th of the same month, as the receipt of the Changwon District Court No. 53347.

C. Upon the death of the deceased D, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer as to the instant real estate under No. 10592, Nov. 6, 2015, which was received by the Changwon District Court on November 6, 2015.

(hereinafter “this case’s registration of transfer of ownership”). / [Grounds for recognition] without dispute, entry of Gap’s evidence Nos. 1 through 6, and purport of the whole pleadings.

2. The assertion and judgment

A. The Plaintiff’s assertion is de facto a co-property of the Plaintiff and the deceased C, and the Plaintiff and the deceased C donated the instant real estate under the premise that the deceased D, who is the deceased C, performed a duty to support, and the Defendant, who solely inherited the instant real estate, as the deceased D’s heir, is also liable to support the Defendant under the above gift contract.

Nevertheless, the defendant did not perform the duty to support the plaintiff, and the defendant cancelled the donation contract in this case on the ground of non-performance of the duty to support and sought payment of KRW 149,00,000, which is the amount equivalent to the plaintiff's share in the market price of real estate for restitution

Even if the instant real estate is the sole property of the deceased C, it is argued that the inheritance shares inherited due to the death of the deceased C were infringed, thus seeking the return of the legal reserve of inheritance.

B. Determination 1) Where a donee is obligated to support the donor, the donor may rescind the gift (Article 556(1)2 of the Civil Act). The evidence presented by the Plaintiff alone is the real estate of this case.

arrow