1. The Client’s Crisis

After her father passed away, the client entered into inheritance division proceedings with her siblings. There were five heirs in total: the mother and four children.

The estate consisted of deposits, insurance proceeds, and a small parcel of miscellaneous land, totaling about KRW 13.77 million. Although the amount was not large, the dispute within it was by no means small. That was because most of the other heirs had already received a fair amount of real estate or cash during the father’s lifetime.

The problem was that, in the meantime, the other siblings claimed that the client had also received a lifetime gift of about KRW 40 million. If this claim were accepted, it would be treated as the client’s special benefit and deducted from her inheritance share. From the client’s perspective, money she had never received would be treated as if she had, and her share would be reduced even from the already small remaining estate.

What is more, one of the other siblings even produced a written confirmation stating that the client had assigned her reserved share rights. The client maintained that she had never prepared such a document with genuine intent, but once the document had been submitted, she also had to challenge its validity. Although it appeared to be a case involving a small sum, in reality the client’s inheritance rights themselves were under threat.

2. Key Issues

The issues to be disputed in this case were as follows.

The most important question was whether the client had in fact received a special benefit of KRW 40 million. A special benefit is a fact that must be proven by the party asserting it. It is not enough for the other side to simply say that they “gave” it; objective evidence such as the flow of funds or dispositive documents must support the claim. If this burden of proof could not be overcome, the client’s special benefit could be settled at zero won.

The special benefits of the other heirs also had to be addressed. The mother and the other siblings had already received significant assets during the father’s lifetime, including real estate, the right to claim return of a lease deposit, and land gifts. If all of these were recognized as special benefits, their concrete inheritance shares would be greatly reduced, or in some cases they would be deemed “excess special-benefit recipients” who had already received more than their own share. Such recipients cannot receive anything additional from the remaining estate.

The final issue concerned the reserved-share assignment confirmation. We had to dispute whether this document submitted by another sibling was based on the client’s true intent, or whether it had been obtained through coercion or deception.

3. The Strategy

Attorney Noh Jong-eon, the managing partner, did not take a light approach simply because the case involved a small amount. Even though the remaining estate was only KRW 13.77 million, the case hinged entirely on how the special benefits were organized and how much of that amount the client would ultimately receive.

First, regarding the other side’s claim that the client had received KRW 40 million as a gift, we examined the evidence supporting that assertion one by one and pointed out that the objective basis was lacking. Emphasizing the principle that the party asserting a special benefit must prove it, we argued that the documents submitted by the other side were insufficient to establish that the client had received that amount from the deceased.

At the same time, we actively brought out the special benefits of the other heirs. We organized the evidence and registry records showing that the mother had received about KRW 173 million in a claim for return of an apartment lease deposit from the deceased, that one sibling had received land gifts involving several parcels worth about KRW 153 million, that another sibling had received about KRW 74 million in personal taxi purchase funds, and that another sibling had received about KRW 72 million in repayment of guarantee debts and real estate gifts.

When all of these special benefits were totaled, the deemed estate amounted to approximately KRW 486.56 million. After multiplying this amount by each person’s statutory inheritance ratio and deducting the special benefits each had already received, the three siblings other than the mother and the client were all found to have already received more than their entitled shares. The mother was in the same position. In the end, the client became the only heir who had not yet received her share.

As for the reserved-share assignment confirmation, we argued that the client had not prepared the document with genuine intent and explained in detail the unnatural circumstances under which it was created.

4. Outcome and Recovery

The court determined that the client’s special benefit was zero won, finding that the other side had not sufficiently proven the alleged KRW 40 million. By contrast, all lifetime benefits received by the other heirs were recognized as special benefits. As a result, the mother and the three other siblings were all classified as excess special-benefit recipients, and the court concluded that they had no additional share to receive from the remaining estate.

The court ordered that the entire remaining estate of approximately KRW 13.77 million be distributed solely to the client.

This case shows that even when the remaining estate is not large, the outcome can change completely depending on how special benefits are handled. Ultimately, the way to protect inheritance rights was to objectively reveal that the other heirs had already received substantial assets and to block the unfair special-benefit claim imposed on the client.

If you are wondering how to respond in a similar situation, we recommend consulting an expert, as the outcome may vary depending on the specific facts of the case.

Attorney in charge: Managing Partner Attorney Noh Jong-eon

To protect confidentiality, some parts of this case have been anonymized to the extent that the essence of the matter is not compromised.

Watch the video on Law Firm Jonjae’s YouTube channel, 'Family Law Unboxing'