Client A inherited a considerable amount of land from his father B, but he could not dispose of the inherited land at will because A's grandmother and uncles forced him to set up a provisional registration for sales reservation arguing that they have to protect the family's property, at the time of B’s death. A's grandmother and uncles promised that they would terminate the registration when A becomes an adult.

On the other hand, after B's death, A's grandfather C requested to provide collateral for a bank loan under his name, and A's mother D agreed to set up a mortgage on the inherited land. However, C did not repay his debt, and D, concerned that the inherited land would be auctioned, took out a loan to pay off C's debt.

Later, after C’s death, A and D expected C's heirs, A's grandparents, and uncles, to repay C's debt. However, A's grandmother and uncles rejected A and D's request for reimbursement, arguing that father B's land was merely held in trust in the name of C and that C wanted to gift the land held in trust in the name to an uncle other than B. In the meantime, they canceled the provisional registration in exchange for A's decision to give her grandmother 100 million won for living expenses, and they even sued A for fraud, saying that A did not pay the promised living expenses. Accordingly, A sought help from the Cha & Kwon Law Offices to resolve the situation.

Our firm carefully reviewed the property records inherited by A from B and confirmed that there was no data to prove the claim of the grandmother and uncles. Also, through A's phone call records, it was confirmed that the uncles made several statements in line with A's claims regarding C's property. Our firm organized the investigation into detailed records, and based on this, we argued that: 1. as much as D subrogated C's debts, C's heirs were responsible for repaying the debts to D according to the portion of the inheritance 2. Since the preliminary period for the sale and purchase of inherited land is a false temporary period, it must be canceled, so the gift in exchange for this cannot be regarded as a conditional gift. Hence, even if it is argued that A verbally agreed to provide the inheritance as a gift, it can be canceled at any time (Civil Law Article 555). The court made decisions, siding with Cha & Kwon Law Offices in all of the related cases.

This case was difficult to understand as the facts of the matter were complicated with several parties and the complicated type of inherited property involved. Our firm divided the facts by issue and clearly organized them, putting related data in a diagram and presenting it in writing so that the case can be easily understood. In addition, based on this, our firm explained the conflicting issues from various angles whether A and D's arguments were valid, and as a result, we were able to win all the cases. In complex cases, it is very important how to organize the facts and decide which issues to focus. Cha & Kwon Law Offices organizes the client's case in an easy-to-understand way through consultation, ultimately producing satisfying results.