Plaintiff (Attorney O Byung-il et al., Counsel for the plaintiff-appellant)

Defendant 1 and one other (Law Firm Squa, Attorneys Jeon-jin et al., Counsel for the defendant-appellant)

April 7, 2010

Seoul Central District Court Decision 2008Gahap51040 Decided June 18, 2009

1. The plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed in entirety.

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

The judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. The judgment of the court of first instance shall be revoked. ① Defendant 1 shall pay to the Plaintiff 5% per annum from November 21, 2007 to the date the judgment of the appellate court of this case was rendered, and 20% per annum from the next day to the date the judgment of the appellate court of this case is made. ② The Defendants shall implement the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration completed on June 8, 1998 with respect to each of 2/6 shares in the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff by the procedure for cancellation of ownership transfer registration completed on June 8, 1998 with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff. ② Defendant 1 shall pay to the Plaintiff 5% per annum from the next day to November 21, 2007 to the date the judgment of the appellate court of this case was rendered, ② Defendant 1 shall return each share to the Plaintiff with respect to each of the real estate listed in the separate sheet to the Plaintiff.

1. Quotation of judgment of the first instance;

① The Plaintiff, as its primary cause of claim, was Defendant 1 had the right to claim damages against Defendant 1. The Defendants completed the registration of ownership transfer for reasons of donation on the attached list without Nonparty 1’s consent. The Plaintiff acquired the inheritance shares from Nonparty 2, who is another co-inheritors after Nonparty 1’s death. Defendant 1 is liable to pay damages to the Plaintiff KRW 876,420,266 as well as damages for delay on each of the real estate listed in the attached list. The Defendants asserted that “No. 2/6 shares in the attached list No. 1 were liable to the Plaintiff for the cancellation registration of ownership transfer on June 8, 1998,” and that “No. 2/6 shares in the attached list No. 1 were transferred to the Plaintiff with the consent of Nonparty 2, who is the co-inheritors and the other co-inheritors.” The Defendants asserted that “No. 1 and the other co-inheritors were liable for the return of ownership shares in the attached list No. 1 and the other co-inheritors No. 5’s share. 2. 1 and the other co-inheritors. 2. 3.

“The gift on the real estate indicated in the attached list was made on June 8, 1998, and the deceased non-party 1 died on November 20, 2007. As seen earlier, 1/2 shares of the real estate indicated in the attached list, which was donated to Defendant 2, who is not the deceased non-party 1’s co-inheritors, cannot be the subject of a claim for restitution of forced inheritance, since it is not a donated property for one year before the deceased non-party 1’s death (the commencement of inheritance). Therefore, in this respect, the plaintiff’s assertion against Defendant 2 is without merit.”

2. Conclusion

Therefore, all of the plaintiff's main and conjunctive claims are dismissed as they are without merit, and the judgment of the court of first instance is just, and the plaintiff's appeal against the defendants is dismissed as they are without merit. It is so decided as per Disposition.

[Attachment]

Judge Lee Han-ju (Presiding Judge)