Constitutional Court: "Sibling Inheritance Reserved Portion System Unconstitutional Regardless of Deceased's Intent" (Comprehensive)

Constitutional Court: "Legal Provisions Lacking Forfeiture of Inheritance Portion for Unfilial Heirs Must Be Amended"

The Constitutional Court has ruled that the "reserved portion system," which guarantees a certain percentage of inheritance to siblings regardless of the deceased's wishes, is unconstitutional.

Chief Justice Lee Jong-seok of the Constitutional Court and the justices are seated on the 25th in the Grand Bench of the Constitutional Court in Jongno-gu, Seoul, for the ruling on the constitutional review of Article 1112 of the Civil Act and the statutory system of reserved portions, as well as the constitutional complaint.
[Photo by Yonhap News]

Additionally, the Constitutional Court decided that the legal provisions failing to specify grounds for forfeiture of the reserved portion for heirs who have committed acts of filial misconduct, such as neglecting the deceased for a long period or abusing them mentally or physically, must be amended.

On the 25th, the Constitutional Court issued a unanimous decision by all justices declaring Articles 1112 to 1116 and Article 1118 of the Civil Act unconstitutional or constitutionally incompatible in a constitutional review and constitutional complaint case.

The reserved portion system guarantees half (for spouses, sons, and daughters) to one-third (for parents and siblings when there are no spouses or children) of the statutory inheritance share to protect the survivors' right to live.

If an heir's actual inheritance from the deceased's estate is less than their reserved portion, they can claim the difference from other heirs or third parties who received lifetime gifts or legacies (gifts made by will). Each heir's reserved portion is half to one-third of the statutory inheritance share they would have originally received if there were no lifetime gifts or legacies.

The basic property for calculating the reserved portion includes gifts made by the deceased up to one year before death. However, property gifted to co-heirs is included in the basic property without any time limitation.

First, the Constitutional Court, presuming that the reserved portion system restricts free disposition of property and property rights, ruled that Article 1112, Paragraph 4 of the Civil Act, which recognizes the reserved portion for the deceased's siblings, is unconstitutional.

The Court stated, "It is difficult to find a reasonable justification for granting reserved portion rights to the deceased's siblings, despite their minimal contribution to the formation of the inheritance estate or expectation of inheritance."

However, the Court found that the legal provisions that do not separately specify grounds for forfeiture of the reserved portion require legislative supplementation and thus declared constitutional incompatibility.

The Court said, "Recognizing the reserved portion for heirs who have long neglected the deceased or committed filial misconduct such as mental or physical abuse contradicts the general public's sense of justice and common sense," and added, "It cannot be considered reasonable not to separately stipulate grounds for forfeiture of the reserved portion."

It further stated, "While the public interests pursued by the reserved portion system?protection of survivors' right to live, contribution to the formation of the inheritance estate, guarantee of inheritance expectations, and family solidarity?are very important, the legal provisions that do not separately specify grounds for forfeiture and include siblings as reserved portion beneficiaries are unfair, and the infringement on the property rights of the deceased and recipients caused by this is more serious and significant than the public interest."