logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대구지방법원김천지원 2020.06.17 2019가단32435
유류분반환
Text

1. The defendant's each of the plaintiffs 88,485,00 won and 5% per annum from January 10, 2020 to June 17, 2020.

Reasons

1. The following facts are not disputed between the parties or may be acknowledged in full view of the purport of the entire pleadings in each entry in Gap evidence No. 1-2, 2, 3, 4, 5, Gap evidence No. 2 and 3, and Eul evidence No. 1-2:

D on March 15, 1942, married with E, died on December 1, 1956, and reported marriage with F on April 2, 1957.

B. According to the transcript of D, G (the death of June 8, 1996), the Defendant, and H are children of D and E, and I, the Plaintiff, and Plaintiff B (hereinafter “Plaintiffs”) are children of D and F, and the Defendant, H, and the Plaintiffs are registered as F’s children on the family relation certificate with D, and the family relation certificate with F is registered as F.

C. D The Plaintiff died on November 5, 201. On November 5, 201, the Plaintiff completed the registration of ownership transfer with respect to F’s share (1/2) among the instant land on October 11, 201, on the ground of the inheritance by a division of consultation held on November 5, 201 and the name of F and the Defendant on April 25, 201. The Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer under the name of the Defendant on October 11, 2016, on the ground that F’s share (1/2) was donated as of October 11, 2016.

F The deceased on December 28, 2016 (hereinafter “the deceased”), and the deceased did not have positive inherited property and inheritance obligations at the time of the deceased’s death.

E. The Defendant, on April 13, 2017, was handed down with a certified copy of the network D as the child of the network D and the network E. However, on April 13, 2017, the Daegu Family Court Decision 2016Ddan2151, confirming the existence of the paternity relationship between the Defendant and the deceased.

2. The plaintiffs and I asserted that they are the successors of the deceased, and the defendant and H are the children of the deceased and D, but the deceased are the children of the deceased and D, as they were born between the deceased and D, and not only the plaintiffs and I, but also the defendant and H are the successors of the deceased.

The Defendant is between the Deceased and the Deceased.

arrow