Open Decision Ledger · Family & inheritance law
Succession of a property division obligation after one former spouse dies
Supreme Court, Jan. 15, 2026, 2024Seu876 (ruling)
Case name: 재산분할
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
When one party to an agreed divorce dies after the divorce has been reported, does that party's obligation to divide marital property pass to the heirs, and may the surviving former spouse claim division against those heirs?
Holding
Yes. Because the essence of the property division system is to settle the property relations formed during marriage at the time of divorce, an obligation to divide is not extinguished by death but passes to the heirs, and, absent special circumstances, the surviving former spouse may claim division against the heirs of the deceased former spouse. A claim to divide property under Article 839-2(1) of the Civil Code, which applies by Article 843 to judicial divorce as well, is in essence a claim to settle marital property.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
혼인중 형성한 재산관계를 이혼에 즈음하여 청산하는 것을 본질로 하는 재산분할 제도의 취지와 공평의 관념에 비추어 보면, 이혼을 한 당사자 일방이 사망하는 경우 그의 재산분할의무는 상속인들에게 승계된다고 보아야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
In light of the purport of the property division system, the essence of which is to settle, upon divorce, the property relations formed during marriage, and the concept of fairness, where one of the parties who divorced dies, his or her obligation to make property division must be regarded as being succeeded to by the heirs.
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
재항고를 모두 기각한다. 재항고비용 중 청구인의 재항고로 인한 부분은 청구인이, 상대방들의 재항고로 인한 부분은 상대방들이 각 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The reappeals are all dismissed. Of the costs of reappeal, the portion attributable to the claimant's reappeal shall be borne by the claimant, and the portions attributable to the opposing parties' reappeals shall be borne by the opposing parties respectively.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
재산분할 제도는 이혼 등의 경우에 부부가 혼인중 공동으로 형성한 재산을 청산·분배하는 것을 주된 목적으로 한다.
Unofficial English translation
The property division system has as its main purpose the settlement and distribution of the property jointly formed by the spouses during marriage in cases of divorce and the like.
Factors
- 혼인중에 형성한 재산의 청산뿐만 아니라 이혼 후의 부양적 요소, 정신적 손해를 배상하기 위한 급부로서의 성질 등도 함께 고려하여야 하고
- 이혼으로 인한 재산분할청구권은 행사상의 일신전속성을 가지지만
- 혼인중 형성한 재산관계를 이혼에 즈음하여 청산하는 것을 본질로 하는 재산분할 제도의 취지와 공평의 관념에 비추어 보면
- 특별한 사정이 없는 한
Unofficial English translation
• not only the settlement of the property formed during marriage but also post-divorce support-related factors and the nature of the performance as compensation for mental damages must be taken into consideration together, and
• although the claim for property division arising from divorce has a character of being strictly personal in its exercise,
• in light of the purport of the property division system, the essence of which is to settle, upon divorce, the property relations formed during marriage, and the concept of fairness,
• absent special circumstances,
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2013. 6. 20. 선고 2010므4071, 4088 전원합의체 판결 참조
Unofficial English translation
See Supreme Court en banc Judgment 2010Meu4071, 4088, decided June 20, 2013
Decisions referred to
대법원 2013. 6. 20. 선고 2010므4071, 4088 전원합의체 판결(공2013하, 1332), 대법원 2022. 7. 28. 자 2022스613 결정(공2022하, 1771)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
What circumstances are special enough to bar a surviving former spouse from claiming division against the heirs of the deceased spouse?
A later decision defining the special circumstances that bar the claim, or a record showing a fully concluded division agreement or a divorce not yet completed at death, would require this entry to be read again. Any amendment to Article 839-2(1) or Article 843 of the Civil Code would do the same.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
7 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-24
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on 7 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 6 (relation to precedent).
Axis 6 (Relation to precedent): Primary “Follows earlier decisions” vs Independent “Cannot be determined”
The primary may infer continuity with precedent from the general account of property division, while the independent may leave the relationship unconfirmed because the supplied text identifies no prior decision.
대법원 2013. 6. 20. 선고 2010므4071, 4088 전원합의체 판결 참조Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The Seoul High Court, in its ruling of 27 November 2024 (2024Beu2020), held that the claimant's property division claim against the heirs of the deceased, brought after the agreed divorce had been reported and the deceased then died, was well founded, because the property division agreement between the claimant and the deceased could not be treated as fully concluded. It also valued the apartment as at the date of the divorce registration, valued the machinery in the claimant's factory at the figure in the asset list filed in the claimant's individual rehabilitation case, and set the division at 40 per cent to the claimant and 60 per cent to the deceased.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error, though it noted that part of the reasoning below was not entirely apt, and accepted the conclusion that the deceased's obligation to divide property had passed to the respondents, finding no misstatement of the law that affected the outcome. It likewise accepted the finding that the division agreement was not fully concluded, and the valuation date, the valuation of the machinery, the effect of the dismissal of the rehabilitation proceedings and the 40 to 60 division ratio. The Justices unanimously dismissed all the re-appeals.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case in which the surviving former spouse shows special circumstances that bar the claim, since the Court allowed the claim only where such circumstances are absent.
- A case in which the deceased and the surviving spouse fully concluded a property division agreement, since the claim below was allowed on the ground that no such agreement was fully formed.
- A case in which the party died before the divorce itself was completed, since the rule concerns a party who has already divorced.
Record verification notes
First check the date the divorce was reported and the date of death, since the rule turns on death after divorce. Then look for any complete property division agreement between the two, and for facts said to be special circumstances, before relying on the right to claim against the heirs. The record must also carry support for the valuation date, the asset values and the division ratio, which the Court reviewed on both sides' re-appeals.
From the official text
Points at issue
재산분할 제도의 목적과 취지 / 이혼을 한 당사자 일방이 사망한 경우, 그 재산분할의무가 상속인들에게 승계되는지 여부(적극) 및 이혼을 한 당사자 일방은 사망한 전 배우자의 상속인들을 상대로 재산분할을 청구할 수 있는지 여부(원칙적 적극)
Unofficial English translation
The purpose and purport of the property division system / Whether, where one of the parties who divorced dies, his or her obligation to make property division is succeeded to by the heirs (affirmative) and whether one of the parties who divorced may claim property division against the heirs of the deceased former spouse (affirmative in principle)
Summary of the holding
협의상 이혼한 자 일방은 다른 일방에 대하여 재산분할을 청구할 수 있고(민법 제839조의2 제1항), 재판상 이혼에 따른 재산분할청구권에도 위 제839조의2가 준용된다(민법 제843조). 재산분할 제도는 이혼 등의 경우에 부부가 혼인중 공동으로 형성한 재산을 청산·분배하는 것을 주된 목적으로 한다. 이는 민법이 혼인중 부부의 어느 일방이 자기 명의로 취득한 재산은 그의 특유재산으로 하는 부부별산제를 취하고 있는 것을 보완하여, 이혼을 할 때는 그 재산의 명의와 상관없이 재산의 형성 및 유지에 기여한 정도 등 실질에 따라 각자의 몫을 분할하여 귀속시키고자 하는 제도이다. 비록 재산분할 청구 사건에 있어서 혼인중에 형성한 재산의 청산뿐만 아니라 이혼 후의 부양적 요소, 정신적 손해를 배상하기 위한 급부로서의 성질 등도 함께 고려하여야 하고, 이러한 이유에서 이혼으로 인한 재산분할청구권은 행사상의 일신전속성을 가지지만, 혼인중 형성한 재산관계를 이혼에 즈음하여 청산하는 것을 본질로 하는 재산분할 제도의 취지와 공평의 관념에 비추어 보면, 이혼을 한 당사자 일방이 사망하는 경우 그의 재산분할의무는 상속인들에게 승계된다고 보아야 한다. 따라서 특별한 사정이 없는 한 이혼을 한 당사자 일방은 사망한 전 배우자의 상속인들을 상대로 재산분할을 청구할 수 있다.
Order
재항고를 모두 기각한다. 재항고비용 중 청구인의 재항고로 인한 부분은 청구인이, 상대방들의 재항고로 인한 부분은 상대방들이 각 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The reappeals are all dismissed. Of the costs of reappeal, the portion attributable to the claimant's reappeal shall be borne by the claimant, and the portions attributable to the opposing parties' reappeals shall be borne by the opposing parties respectively.
Provisions referred to
민법 제839조의2 제1항, 제843조
Read 2026-10-24 · Cross-read 2026-10-24. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger