The Goo Hara Act was abolished, but… Recognition of contributions to the law, late Goo Hara’s inheritance lawsuit

Seek 故. Photo|Star Today DB

[Reporter Se-yeon Park, Daily Economy Star Today]

In relation to the inheritance of the late Goo Hara from girl group Kara, a court ruling came out saying that the contribution to the father who raised the brothers and sisters of Goo Hara alone should be recognized.

On the 18th, Gwangju Family Court’s second housekeeper ruled a partial citation in a lawsuit filed by Goo Hara’s brother, Goo Ho-in, against his birth mother, A.

On the 21st, attorney Noh Jong-eon, who is in charge of Goo Ho-in’s legal representative, said, “The first trial court, Gwangju District Court, decided that the contribution of Goo Hara’s survivors would be 20%.” He said, “As a result, Goo Hara’s bereaved family and birth mother did not divide the inheritance by 5:5, but divided the inheritance in a ratio of 6:4.”

The judge said, “The fact that Goo Hara’s father raised him alone without his partner’s help for about 12 years cannot be seen as simply a part of his fulfillment of the father’s duty to support children who are underage.” In the case of parenting as a spouse, there is no provision as to the legal inheritance of the spouse, so it can be seen that there is a greater need to amend the legal inheritance of the father who raised Koo Hara alone for a long time through the contribution system.

Attorney Noh said, “It was a mainstream precedent for the court not to recognize the contribution for the circumstances in which a single parent raised a child alone in a single parent family.” “Under the current legal system, the contribution was recognized by comprehensively considering all circumstances. The judgment of the court above is a further judgment from the standpoint of the existing court under the current legal system, where the Goo Hara Act has not yet been passed.”

Although the court’s advanced ruling was drawn, it is still difficult to lose the inheritance rights to parents who abandoned their children without amendment to the ‘Goo Hara Act’. Lawyer Noh added, “In that respect, the passage of the Goo Hara Act is desperate and we want to do our best to pass the Goo Hara Act.”

Regarding whether to appeal, Noh said to Maeil Business Daily Star Today, “The appeal is under review, but you must follow the wishes of the survivors. This judgment is an extremely exceptional case, so we need to worry.”

Goo Hara passed away on November 24, 2019 at the age of 28. Goo Hara’s father transferred his inheritance to his brother Goo Ho-in. When Goo Hara was 9 years old, her birth mother, A, had not been contacted for 20 years, but when Goo Hara died, she appeared at the funeral home with a lawyer and insisted on her inheritance. It filed a lawsuit against the mother who did not fulfill her obligations to request a trial for the division of inherited property.

The so-called ‘Goo Hara Act’ was initiated by Goo Ho-in, who filed a national petition for amendment of the Civil Law in March, with the consent of more than 100,000 people, which is the legal petition requirement. The main point is that the mother, who has not returned after running away from home for more than 20 years, said it would be unfair to inherit the property of Mr. Goo, and asked for legislative measures to prevent this. Even if it is a direct continuation or a direct descendant, if the obligation to support is significantly neglected, add it to the reason for disqualification. Under the current civil law, the heir to Goo Hara who died without a spouse becomes the birth parent, and the father and mother inherit half of Goo Hara’s property.

Goo, who has raised her voice for the enactment of the Goo Hara Act, said at a press conference in the National Assembly in May, “When Hara was 9 years old and I was 11 years old, my mother ran away from home and was not contacted for almost 20 years. There was no word for mother. During the funeral, she suddenly came to visit, and the lawyers on the mother’s side demanded half of the price for the sale of the real estate. It was so shocking,” he said and urged the legislation of the Goo Hara Act. However, the Goo Hara Act was automatically abolished because it was not passed by the National Assembly in the 20s.

<Noh Jong-eon, the lawyer of Goo Ho-in’s official statement>

Good morning

I am attorney Noh Jong-eon, who conducted a trial on the division of inherited property on behalf of the survivors of Goo Hara.

Regarding the request for a trial for the division of inherited property between the mother of Goo Hara and the family members of Goo Hara, the first trial court, Gwangju District Court, decided on December 18, 2020 that the contribution of the family members of Goo Hara Yang was set at 20%. As a result, the legacy of Goo Hara’s bereaved family and her mother was not divided by 5:5, but by a ratio of 6:4. In the case of a single parent raising a child alone in a single parent family, the court did not recognize the contribution was a mainstream precedent.

Under the current legal system, the court’s judgment, which acknowledged the contribution by comprehensively considering various circumstances, is an advanced judgment from the standpoint of the existing court under the current legal system, where the Goo Hara Act has not yet been passed.

The court cited the following points as a basis for acknowledging the contribution of the bereaved families of Goo Hara as 20%.

① Parents are responsible for raising minor children jointly even if they divorce, so the fact that the father raised alone for about 12 years without the help of the other person cannot be regarded as simply a part of fulfilling the father’s obligation to support minor children.

② Article 1009 (2) of the Civil Code stipulates that the spouse’s inheritance should be determined by adding 50% of the inheritance of the joint heir, taking into account the circumstances in which the spouse bears the obligation to live together and support while the marriage is maintained with the heir. Furthermore, intangible contributing behavior of spouse’s long-term cohabitation nursing can be actively considered as one of the factors for recognizing the contribution (refer to the Supreme Court’s decision on Nov. 21, 2019, 2014S44, 45). Similar to support, if one of the parents who bears the primary duty of support or the duty to maintain a life for a minor child is raising the child alone without the other’s help, there is no same rule as the legal inheritance of the spouse. It can be seen that there is a greater need to amend the legal inheritance of the father who raised Goo Hara alone for a long time.

③ The other party has not negotiated an interview with Goo Hara for about 12 years at all, and there is no indication that the father interfered with the interview with the other party.

④ Parents’ obligation to raise children who are minors is not a complete fulfillment by simply paying parenting expenses, but is a comprehensive duty to protect and educate children for their physical and mental development. Even if the income from Goo Hara’s singer activities did not separately pay for childrearing, it cannot be considered that she did not raise Goo Hara, and even if she could receive past child support from the other party, the part of raising Goo Hara alone is still fair. In light of the points that should be considered, it is considerable to see that the father specifically supported Goo Hara, so that it is necessary to adjust the claimant’s inheritance in order to promote substantial fairness among joint heirs.

⑤ In addition, the contribution of the surviving family is finally decided at 20%, taking into account the above circumstances and the fact that the past request for child support has been filed between the father and the other party in relation to the specific calculation criteria for the contribution.

One regret is that even if the court respects these circumstances as much as possible, it is practically impossible to judge that parents who have abandoned their children will lose their full inheritance rights unless the Goo Hara Act is amended.

In that respect, the passage of the Goo Hara Act is desperate and we want to do our best without stopping to pass the Goo Hara Act. We sincerely ask for your continued interest and support for the passage of the Goo Hara Act.

And I would like to express my sincere thanks to the many people who have cherished Goo Hara.

December 21, 2020

Law Firm S

Lawyer Noh Jong-Eon

psyon@mk.co.kr

Photo|Star Today DB

[Ⓒmottokorea All rights reserved]

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply