판례상으로 본 상속회복청구권의 상대방

In 14. Feb. 2002. Civil Act article 999 (2) is amended that the Right To Request for the Recovery of Inheritance is terminated within three years after becoming aware of the infringement or within ten years since there has been a act of infringement. At least, real inheritor requests for remedy more easily than ever to person who pretends to have the right of inheritance. Today there is not almost a registration lawsuit about ownership of real property. This situation is due to be improved conscious of people’ right. Nowadays there is no discussion about Right To Request for the Recovery of Inheritance. This is also due to a same reason. In any cases, ownership and claim for real right at ownership shall not be completed in extinctive prescription. And it is a possible to claim of a real right. Only exception about this legal problem is a inheritance. Due to a this exception, a person who pretends to have the right of inheritance, good or absence of negligence isn’t matter, is reflectively protected. This is deemed illegal or improper on a purpose of general principle or accomplishment of justice. There is still a supporting argument at existence of this system. I suggest this system to be abolished. If my opinion is not possible, legal nature of the Right To Request for the Recovery of Inheritance has be changed into a initial Supreme Court’s opinion. Or, Like a in minority opinion, Supreme Court. 24. Dec. 1991. 90다5740, judicial decision must be changed into excluding a co-inheritor within the scope of person who pretends to have the right of inheritance.