Constitutional Court rules ‘sibling inheritance’ unconstitutional Forced inheritance from corrupt families is inconsistent with the Constitution Civil law provisions must be revised by the end of next year Inheritance system in the era of large families ‘surgery’ after 47 years
On the afternoon of the 25th, the judges are seated ahead of the ruling on the constitutional appeal and unconstitutionality of the reserve system at the Supreme Court of the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul. Reporter Shin Won-gun [email protected]
The Constitutional Court ruled that the ‘reserve share system’, which guarantees inheritance to family members who did not leave property in their will, violates the Constitution. It was also decided that the contribution of family members who provided care or contributed to the creation of assets should also be recognized in the reserve. The reserve system, which was introduced in 1977 to guarantee inheritance to children other than the eldest son, such as women in the era of large families, is expected to undergo major changes in the overall inheritance system as it is being operated on for the first time in 47 years.
On the 25th, in the Supreme Court ruling in Jongno-gu, Seoul, the Constitutional Court unanimously ruled that Article 1112, Paragraph 4 of the Civil Act, which regulates the reserve of brothers and sisters, is unconstitutional. The Constitutional Court made this decision after hearing 47 cases, including requests for constitutional appeals filed by individuals and requests for unconstitutionality trials by the court, and through public arguments in May of last year.
The Constitutional Court said, “The reserve system was a system that arose in the agricultural society of the past when several families collectively formed property centered on extended families living together,” adding, “In a situation where there has been a change in the meaning and form of family, such as the increase in single-person households, the decedent’s He said, “It is difficult to find a valid reason for granting inheritance rights to brothers and sisters, even though their contribution to property formation is hardly recognized.” Following the decision of the Constitutional Court, this provision lost effect.
The Constitutional Court ruled that it was necessary to maintain the reserved portion of parents, children, and spouses (Article 1112, Nos. 1 to 3 of the Civil Act). The Constitutional Court said, “The role of family has an important meaning even today, and heirs maintain close solidarity through the heirs.” “The heirs still perform the function of realizing the expectation of equal inheritance among co-heirs.” He emphasized.
However, the Constitutional Court ruled that the ‘corrupt family’ who committed abuse and abandonment should not be recognized as a reserve. At the same time, a decision was made that was inconsistent with the Constitution, recognizing that the reserved portion of parents, children, and spouses is only valid until December 31, 2025. The National Assembly should amend the law by then so as to not recognize the reserve for the corrupt family. The purpose is to improve the system so that corrupt families lose their reserves, as in the so-called ‘Goo Hara’s Mom’ controversy, while the reserve system itself persists. The Constitutional Court said, “Recognizing the inheritance of an heir who committed immoral acts runs counter to the legal sentiments and common sense of the general public.”
On the other hand, it was judged that the inheritance rights of family members who actively provided care and support or contributed to the creation of assets should be guaranteed. For example, even if a father passed down property to a ‘filial son’, the current portion must be paid to other surviving family members if they request a portion, but the intention is that in the future, the reserved portion should be calculated excluding the property received by the filial son. An official from the Constitutional Court explained, “This is the first decision to comprehensively review and rule on the reserve system itself,” and “It recognizes the constitutional legitimacy of the system, but calls for legislative improvement.”
Oil fraction
This refers to the minimum percentage of inheritance that the surviving family members can receive, regardless of the deceased’s wishes. ‘Yuyu’ means to pass on to future generations. Even if the deceased left a will to pass on all of his assets to his son, his wife and daughters can receive one-half of the statutory inheritance. If the deceased has no spouse or children, the deceased’s parents or siblings can receive one-third of the legal inheritance. However, according to the Constitutional Court’s decision on the 25th, brothers and sisters can no longer receive the reserved portion.
Reporter Jang Eun-ji [email protected]
