Background
Some 25 years ago, our client bought a property in their mother's name (a title trust). After the mother's death, our client had the property transferred back into their own name under a notarized will, whereupon the other siblings sued to cancel that registration, claiming that "it is our mother's estate, so give us our shares."
What Was at Stake
The siblings denied the will's validity, asserting that the mother lacked mental capacity when it was notarized. Had that been accepted, our client would have had to share with the siblings a property they had in substance bought with their own money.
How Changchun Helped
Changchun (attorney Jonghoon Kim) established the title trust agreement of 25 years earlier by proving, through witness examination and other evidence, that our client had borne the purchase price, the reconstruction contributions and the property taxes throughout. We further argued forcefully that the notarized will was valid, having been made under an agreement to transfer the property itself in lieu of returning those funds.
The court accepted all of Changchun's arguments and dismissed both the siblings' claim to cancel the registration and their alternative claim for the statutory reserve. The case shows that rights can be protected even in an old title trust relationship, where the flow of funds and the circumstances are thoroughly proven. (Outcomes depend on the facts of each case and may differ.)