Mother-in-law who gave house to daughter-in-law saying "I didn't know she would divorce" loses invalidation lawsuit

Mother-in-law Loses Appeal After Initial Victory in Property Ownership Lawsuit

A mother-in-law who transferred ownership registration of two multi-family houses to her daughter-in-law filed a lawsuit claiming that the ownership transfer registration for the houses gifted and sold to the daughter-in-law was invalid, stating she "did not expect a divorce lawsuit to be filed," but lost in the appellate court.

Suwon District Court and Suwon High Court exterior. Yonhap News

According to Yonhap News and others on the 3rd, the Civil Division 4-3 of Suwon District Court (Presiding Judges Kim Yong-tae, Lee Soo-young, Kim Kyung-jin) dismissed the original ruling that favored the mother-in-law A in the ownership cancellation registration appeal lawsuit against her daughter-in-law B, and ruled in favor of B.

In 2021, A transferred ownership registration of two multi-family houses to her daughter-in-law B, one by gift and the other by sale. At that time, B suspected her spouse of infidelity and actually caught the affair. She reportedly informed her brother-in-law of this fact and expressed her intention to divorce. Subsequently, B proceeded with the ownership transfer registration of the multi-family houses and, after living separately from her spouse, filed for divorce about six months later.

Then, A filed a lawsuit against B to cancel the real estate ownership registration. The first trial court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, the mother-in-law.

The first trial court stated, "It appears that A handed over the certificate of seal impression and seal to B without knowing at all that B intended to transfer the ownership of each real estate involved in this case and file for divorce." It added, "A seemed to strongly wish for B to maintain the marriage, and if she had known that B intended to file for divorce, she would not have handed over the documents B requested."

Furthermore, "Considering other circumstances, the ownership transfer registration in this case was carried out against the plaintiff's will without a proper registration cause," the court accepted A's claim and ordered the cancellation of the ownership transfer registration.

However, the appellate court, which was held due to B's appeal, made a completely opposite judgment from the first trial. The appellate court noted, "There is no particular claim or evidence that B deceived A or that elderly A was in a state of incapacity to make decisions, or that the certificate of seal impression was obtained against A's will." It continued, "The fact that A did not know B intended to file for divorce or that A wished for the marriage to continue is merely a subjective inner intention. It is insufficient to recognize the ownership transfer registration as invalid due to being against the plaintiff's will," explaining the reason for dismissing the original ruling.

It also stated, "Considering the acquisition process of each real estate involved in this case and the fact that the defendant couple possessed the registration certificates, paid property taxes, and exercised substantial rights, it appears that the properties originally acquired by the defendant couple were nominally entrusted to the plaintiff."