logobeta
본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.
텍스트 조절
arrow
arrow
(영문) 대법원 1993. 9. 28. 선고 93다6553 판결
[손해배상(자)][집412(3)민,123;공1993.11.15.(956),2955]
Main Issues

A. The meaning of “a woman who is not in the same family register” under Article 1009(2) of the former Civil Code

(b) Whether the biological mother who is her native is "a woman who is not in the same family register";

Summary of Judgment

A. Article 1009(2) of the former Civil Act (amended by Act No. 4199, Jan. 13, 1990) provides that “The share of an inheritance for a woman not in the same family register shall be 1/4 of the male’s share of inheritance for a woman not in the same family register” and clearly lowering the share of inheritance for a woman not in the same family register shall be deemed to have been connected to the intention of the so-called so-called "ex-out women who are not in the same family register" in order to have the old concept and added value less separated from the other family register, and this refers to cases where a woman who is in the position of inheritance is entered in the family register of the inheritee for reasons such as marriage, and thus, the family register differs from the family register of the inheritee.

B. As a co-property inheritor of the inheritee, it is correct to determine that the share of inheritance of the inheritee A is 1/4 of the share of inheritance of the inheritee in the case where there is a person who is a co-property inheritor of the inheritee as his/her mother, who is not in the same family register as the father and divorce of the inheritee before the inheritee died, or as the mother of the inheritee, and there is a person

[Reference Provisions]

Article 1009 (2) of the former Civil Act (amended by Act No. 4199 of Jan. 13, 1990)

Reference Cases

A.B. Supreme Court en banc Decision 79Da1332, 1333 delivered on Nov. 27, 1979 (Gong1980, 12404 delivered on Sept. 28, 1993)

Plaintiff-Appellant

[Judgment of the court below]

Defendant-Appellee

00 00

Judgment of the lower court

Gwangju High Court Decision 92Na8421 delivered on December 28, 1992

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

The costs of appeal are assessed against the plaintiff.

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Article 1009(2) of the former Civil Act (amended by Act No. 4199, Jan. 13, 1990) provides that the inheritance portion for a woman who does not have the same family unit shall be 1/4 of the inheritance portion for a woman who does not have the same family unit, and that is remarkably lowering the inheritance portion for a woman who does not have the same family unit shall be presumed to have been connected to the intention of so-called so-called out-called out-of-the-counter woman to have the old concept and addition so that they can not be separated from the other family for reasons such as marriage. Here, the phrase “ females who are not in the same family unit” refers to a case where a woman who is in the position of inheritance enters another family register for a reason such as marriage and leaves the family register for a different family register (see Supreme Court en banc Decision 79Da132,1333, Nov. 27, 1979).

In the same purport, on February 22, 1983, the deceased non-party 1's co-property heir before the deceased non-party 1's death (as of March 16, 1990), the court below acknowledged that the plaintiff who was not identical with the deceased and the non-party 2 in the same family register as the mother of the above deceased were within the same family register as the deceased, and determined that the plaintiff's share of inheritance is 1/4 of the share of inheritance of 2.

The theory of party members cannot be deemed to include cases where the deceased's father who is the deceased's mother is divorced from the deceased's father and the deceased's father is married to the deceased's family register. However, this is due to the misunderstanding of the purport of the above party members' judgment, and the judgment of the court below is not erroneous in the misapprehension of legal principles as to the concept of "the same family register" as provided in the above legal provisions. There is no reason to discuss.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed and all costs of appeal are assessed against the losing party. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Chocheon-sung (Presiding Justice)

arrow