beta
Text
1. The defendant against the plaintiffs
(a) As to shares of 7/9 of each of the real estate listed in separate sheet 1 and 2.
Reasons
1. Basic facts
A. E owned each real estate listed in the separate sheet (hereinafter “instant real estate”) and died on March 29, 2012 while residing in Japan.
B. The co-inheritors of E have the plaintiff B, C, and the defendant, the wife of the plaintiff A and his children, and both of them have been residing in Japan, but their nationality is Korea.
After the death of E, the plaintiff C filed a report on the renunciation of inheritance with the ASEAN Family Court on August 8, 2012, and the plaintiff A and B filed a report on the renunciation of inheritance on September 13, 2012.
C. Meanwhile, the Defendant completed the registration of ownership transfer due to inheritance under the Daegu District Court No. 4182, Feb. 5, 2013 with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet Nos. 1 and 2, and completed the registration of ownership transfer due to inheritance as prescribed in the separate sheet No. 9820, Mar. 26, 2013 with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet No. 3 through 6.
Plaintiff
A and C applied for the revocation of the renunciation of inheritance to the ASEAN Family Court on October 4, 2013.
[Ground of recognition] Facts without dispute, Gap evidence Nos. 1 through 6, 8 through 11 (including branch numbers for evidence with branch numbers), Eul evidence No. 1 and the purport of the whole pleadings
2. The parties' assertion
A. The defendant's assertion that E's property was jointly inherited with the plaintiffs, without notifying the plaintiffs as to the real estate of this case, and let the plaintiffs report the renunciation of inheritance in Japan, and he completed the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant on the ground that he is a sole inheritor. Since the plaintiffs' renunciation of inheritance is not effective, the registration of transfer of ownership in the name of the defendant on the
B. The plaintiffs asserted that all of the defendant's arguments were residing in Japan, and the above report was accepted to the ASEAN Family Court in accordance with the Japanese law. Thus, the defendant is only the deceased E's sole heir, and the registration in the name of the defendant is valid.
3. Determination A.