[Representation] Family/Inheritance

Barun Law Obtains Court Recognition for the Right to Claim Reimbursement Based on Statutory Inheritance Shares Despite the Inheritance Distribution Not Being Finalized

Case Overview

We represented the plaintiff, one of the co-heirs, in a case where the plaintiff had registered inheritance ownership based on statutory inheritance shares and paid the acquisition tax and other local taxes (including registration tax) on behalf of another co-heir (the defendant). The plaintiff then filed a claim for reimbursement, arguing that the defendant was obligated to pay the equivalent amount.

Judgment and Legal Basis

The first-instance court dismissed the plaintiff's claim, stating that it was difficult to determine whether the real estate in question was part of the inherited estate and how the inheritance shares were distributed, as disputes over the inheritance distribution were still ongoing. The court ruled that the acquisition tax based on statutory inheritance shares could not be considered a definitive obligation of the defendant.

However, we argued that even if the inheritance distribution had not yet been finalized, once an heir registers ownership based on statutory inheritance shares, the effect of acquiring that share does not retroactively disappear, even if the shares are later adjusted through an inheritance distribution agreement or court decision. Thus, the obligation to pay acquisition tax arises at the moment the statutory inheritance share is acquired. Accordingly, if one co-heir pays the acquisition tax on behalf of others due to joint tax liability, they should be able to claim reimbursement immediately, without waiting for the final inheritance distribution.

The appellate court accepted this argument, overturned the first-instance ruling, and upheld the plaintiff’s claim for reimbursement.

Our Role and Argument

Given that Supreme Court precedents on this issue were unclear, we argued from the first-instance trial that:

• If one co-heir pays acquisition tax on behalf of others, they are entitled to reimbursement based on statutory inheritance shares.
• This reimbursement claim is independent of the inheritance distribution proceedings.

Before the appellate court ruling, the Supreme Court issued a decision aligning with our argument, stating: “Even if inheritance distribution has retroactive effects, the fact that co-heirs shared the inherited property before distribution does not retroactively disappear. Therefore, as long as co-heirs jointly hold inherited property, they have a joint obligation to pay taxes on it. If one co-heir pays these taxes, they are entitled to claim reimbursement from the others based on statutory inheritance shares, barring exceptional circumstances."

Leveraging this Supreme Court ruling, we reinforced our position, leading to a successful outcome in the appellate court.

□? Attorneys in charge: Song Bong-Jun, Cho Woong-Kyu, Park Ju-Won

?Attorney Song, Bong Jun's profile

?Attorney Cho, Woong Kyu's profile

?Attorney Park, Ju Won's profile

?

?