{"id":2076,"date":"2026-10-04T12:48:51","date_gmt":"2026-10-04T12:48:51","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/"},"modified":"2026-10-05T08:30:36","modified_gmt":"2026-10-05T08:30:36","slug":"onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/","title":{"rendered":"Unwritten Gifts with a Burden in South Korea: Can the Donor Still Cancel?"},"content":{"rendered":"<p><!--  -->\n\n\n\n<!--  --><\/p>\n<p><!-- ATLAS_SEO_BLOCK_START --><br \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/#article\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/#webpage\"},\"headline\":\"Unwritten Gifts with a Burden in South Korea: Can the Donor Still Cancel?\",\"description\":\"South Korea's Supreme Court held that once a donee has fully performed the burden attached to a gift, the donor cannot cancel the gift under Article 555 of the Korean Civil Act merely because it was not made in writing.\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-04T09:00:00+09:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-10-04T09:00:00+09:00\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"author\":{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/soyoung-park\/#person\",\"name\":\"Soyoung Park\",\"alternateName\":\"\ubc15\uc18c\uc601\",\"jobTitle\":\"Representative Attorney\",\"worksFor\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/#legalservice\"}},\"publisher\":{\"@type\":\"LegalService\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/#legalservice\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\"},\"about\":[\"Cancellation of unwritten gifts with a burden under the Korean Civil Act\",\"Article 555 of the Korean Civil Act (gifts not expressed in writing)\",\"Article 561 of the Korean Civil Act (gifts subject to a burden)\",\"Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983\"]}<\/script><br \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"FAQPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/#faqpage\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"mainEntity\":[{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Is an oral gift legally binding in South Korea?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Yes, a gift contract is formed when one party expresses an intention to give property to the other free of charge and the other party accepts (Article 554 of the Korean Civil Act). However, if the intention to make the gift was not expressed in writing, either party may cancel it (Article 555), and the cancellation does not affect any part that has already been performed (Article 558).\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Can a donor cancel an unwritten gift with a burden after the donee has fully performed the burden?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"As a rule, no. The Supreme Court of Korea held that even if the donor has not yet performed, once the donee has completed the burden, neither party may cancel the gift for lack of a writing, unless there are special circumstances showing that the gift was in substance a gift without a burden, for example because the burden was merely ceremonial or nominal or required no particular effort or cost (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Does a text message promising a gift count as a gift in writing under Korean law?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"One Korean trial court said no. The Suwon District Court accepted that a father's text message promising an apartment to his son was an electronic document, but held that a written expression of donative intent under Article 555 is, by its nature, not something that can be made in electronic form, and it upheld the father's cancellation (Suwon District Court, November 29, 2023, 2023Gadan510741). We did not find a Supreme Court decision on this point.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"When is a gift of real estate considered performed in South Korea?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"When the transfer of ownership is registered. Handing over possession of the property is not enough; the ownership transfer registration must be completed (Supreme Court of Korea, June 14, 2012, 2011Da56873). If the donor provided the documents needed for registration while alive, the gift is treated as performed even if the registration was completed after the donor's death (Supreme Court of Korea, September 18, 2001, 2001Da29643).\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Can an unwritten gift still be canceled more than 10 years later?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"In principle, yes. Cancellation under Article 555 is a special kind of withdrawal rather than cancellation in the ordinary sense, so the limitation period for rights of formation does not apply, and a cancellation made more than 10 years later is in principle valid (Supreme Court of Korea, April 11, 2003, 2003Da1755; Supreme Court of Korea, September 24, 2009, 2009Da37831). The cancellation still does not affect any part already performed (Article 558).\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"If the donee fails to perform the burden, can the donor cancel even after ownership has been transferred?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Yes. Because the rules on bilateral contracts apply to a gift subject to a burden, the donor may cancel the gift when the donee fails to perform the burden even if the gift has already been performed, and Articles 555 and 558 do not apply in that case (Supreme Court of Korea, July 8, 1997, 97Da2177; Supreme Court of Korea, July 26, 2007, 2007Da24602).\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"Does simply denying the other side's claim in court amount to canceling the gift?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"No. Cancellation of an unwritten gift may be implied, but merely disputing the other party's allegations in court is different from asserting cancellation as an independent defense (Supreme Court of Korea, May 9, 1989, 88Daka2271). A donor who wishes to cancel should state that clearly, for example in an answer or a brief.\"}},{\"@type\":\"Question\",\"name\":\"What should foreign residents and businesses in IFEZ take from this decision?\",\"acceptedAnswer\":{\"@type\":\"Answer\",\"text\":\"Anyone who receives or makes a gift of Korean property with conditions attached should put the gift and the burden in writing and keep proof of performance. In the lead case, bank transfer records, a receipt and a survey paid for by the donee helped the courts find that a gift subject to a burden existed and that the burden had been performed (Cheongju District Court, Chungju Branch, September 24, 2020, 2019Gadan23049 (main claim)).\"}}]}<\/script><br \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@type\":[\"LegalService\",\"LocalBusiness\"],\"@id\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/#legalservice\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal\",\"alternateName\":[\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\",\"Atlas Law Firm\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en\/home-en\/\",\"telephone\":\"+82-32-864-8300\",\"email\":\"info@atlaw.kr\",\"priceRange\":\"$$$\",\"address\":{\"@type\":\"PostalAddress\",\"streetAddress\":\"B-2901, 323 Incheon Tower-daero\",\"addressLocality\":\"Yeonsu-gu, Incheon\",\"addressRegion\":\"Incheon Metropolitan City\",\"postalCode\":\"22007\",\"addressCountry\":\"KR\"},\"geo\":{\"@type\":\"GeoCoordinates\",\"latitude\":37.399438,\"longitude\":126.629812},\"openingHoursSpecification\":[{\"@type\":\"OpeningHoursSpecification\",\"dayOfWeek\":[\"Monday\",\"Tuesday\",\"Wednesday\",\"Thursday\",\"Friday\"],\"opens\":\"09:00\",\"closes\":\"18:00\"}],\"areaServed\":[{\"@type\":\"Country\",\"name\":\"South Korea\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"Songdo International Business District\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"Cheongna International City\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"Yeongjong International City\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"Incheon\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"Seoul Metropolitan Area\"},{\"@type\":\"Place\",\"name\":\"Incheon Free Economic Zone (IFEZ)\"}],\"knowsAbout\":[\"Gift Contracts and Donations in South Korea\",\"Korean Civil Act Articles 555 to 561\",\"Real Estate Disputes in South Korea\",\"Inheritance and Family Property Disputes in South Korea\",\"Civil Litigation in South Korea\",\"Incheon Free Economic Zone (IFEZ) Legal Services\"],\"serviceType\":[\"Gift and Donation Disputes\",\"Real Estate Ownership Transfer Litigation\",\"Inheritance Disputes\",\"Civil Litigation\",\"Foreign Direct Investment Legal Services\"]}<\/script><br \/>\n<!-- ATLAS_SEO_BLOCK_END --><\/p>\n<style>@import url('https:\/\/cdn.jsdelivr.net\/gh\/orioncactus\/pretendard@v1.3.9\/dist\/web\/static\/pretendard.css'); \/* \u2500\u2500 Kadence \ud14c\ub9c8 \ucee8\ud150\uce20 \ud3ed override \u2500\u2500 *\/ :root { --global-content-narrow-width: 1290px !important; } .entry-content-wrap { max-width: 1290px !important; } *, *::before, *::after { box-sizing: border-box; margin: 0; padding: 0; } :root { --navy: #0a2540; --navy2: #1a3353; --wine: #722f37; --text: #1a1f36; --muted: #697386; --rule: #e3e8ee; } body { font-family: 'Pretendard', -apple-system, BlinkMacSystemFont, 'Apple SD Gothic Neo', sans-serif; background: #fff; color: var(--text); font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.82; -webkit-font-smoothing: antialiased; } \/* \u2500\u2500 \ud788\uc5b4\ub85c \u2500\u2500 *\/ .hero { max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto; padding: 72px 48px 48px; text-align: center; } .category-tag { font-size: 11px; font-weight: 700; letter-spacing: 1.5px; text-transform: uppercase; color: var(--wine); display: block; margin-bottom: 20px; } .hero h1 { font-size: 44px; font-weight: 700; line-height: 1.22; color: var(--navy); margin-bottom: 28px; word-break: keep-all; } \/* \ud788\uc5b4\ub85c \uc81c\ubaa9 \u2014 h1 \ub300\uc2e0 \uc0ac\uc6a9 (\ud14c\ub9c8 \uc790\ub3d9 h1\uacfc \uc911\ubcf5 \ubc29\uc9c0) *\/ .hero-title { font-size: 44px; font-weight: 700; line-height: 1.22; color: var(--navy); margin-bottom: 28px; word-break: keep-all; } .hero-meta { display: flex; align-items: center; justify-content: center; gap: 12px; padding-bottom: 40px; border-bottom: 1px solid var(--rule); } .hero-info { font-size: 13.5px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.4; } .hero-info strong { color: var(--text); font-weight: 500; } \/* \u2500\u2500 \uc989\uc2dc \ub2f5\ubcc0 \ubc15\uc2a4 \u2500\u2500 *\/ .direct-answer { background: #f6f9fc; border-left: 4px solid var(--navy); border-radius: 0; padding: 20px 24px; margin: 32px 0 40px; font-size: 17px; line-height: 1.75; color: var(--text); } \/* \u2500\u2500 \ubcf8\ubb38 \u2500\u2500 *\/ .content { max-width: 1000px; margin: 0 auto; padding: 52px 48px 100px; } \/* \ubaa9\ucc28 *\/ .toc-nav { margin-bottom: 60px; border: 1px solid #d0d5dd; border-radius: 6px; padding: 28px 32px; } .toc-label { font-size: 20px; font-weight: 700; color: var(--navy); margin-bottom: 14px; } .toc-nav ol { list-style: none; padding-left: 0; } .toc-nav ol li { display: flex; gap: 14px; align-items: baseline; padding: 6px 0; font-size: 17px; } .toc-nav ol li::before { content: none; } .toc-nav ol li a { color: var(--text); text-decoration: none; font-weight: 400; } .toc-nav ol li a:hover { color: var(--wine); } \/* \ub9ac\ub4dc\u00b7\uc694\uc57d\u00b7\ucee8\ud14d\uc2a4\ud2b8 \ud14d\uc2a4\ud2b8 *\/ .lead-text { font-size: 20px; font-weight: 400; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.8; margin-bottom: 24px; } .summary-text { font-size: 18px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.8; margin-bottom: 20px; } .context-text { font-size: 17px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.8; margin-bottom: 52px; } \/* \u2500\u2500 \uc81c\ubaa9 \u2500\u2500 *\/ h2 { font-size: 30px; font-weight: 700; color: var(--wine); margin: 68px 0 16px; word-break: keep-all; } h3 { font-size: 17px; font-weight: 700; color: var(--wine); margin: 38px 0 10px; } p { font-size: 18px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.82; margin-bottom: 18px; } \/* \ud45c *\/ table { width: 100%; border-collapse: collapse; margin: 24px 0; font-size: 14px; } thead tr { background: #fff; } th { color: var(--navy); font-weight: 600; padding: 11px 16px; text-align: left; font-size: 16px; border-bottom: 2px solid var(--navy); } td { padding: 12px 16px; border-bottom: 1px solid var(--rule); color: var(--text); font-size: 16px; } tbody tr:hover { background: #f6f9fc; } \/* \ubd88\ub9bf \ub9ac\uc2a4\ud2b8 *\/ ul, ol:not(.toc-nav ol) { padding-left: 20px; margin-bottom: 16px; } li { font-size: 18px; line-height: 1.78; margin-bottom: 6px; color: var(--text); } \/* \uacc4\uc0b0 \uacf5\uc2dd *\/ .formula { display: flex; align-items: center; gap: 8px; background: #f6f9fc; border: 1px solid var(--rule); border-radius: 8px; padding: 28px 24px; margin: 32px 0; flex-wrap: wrap; justify-content: center; } .f-item { text-align: center; padding: 12px 18px; background: #fff; border: 1px solid var(--rule); border-radius: 5px; } .f-result { background: #fff; border: 2px solid var(--navy); } .f-num { font-size: 22px; font-weight: 700; color: var(--navy); line-height: 1.2; } .f-result .f-num { color: var(--wine); } .f-label { font-size: 11px; color: var(--text); margin-top: 4px; } .f-op { font-size: 20px; color: var(--text); padding: 0 2px; font-weight: 300; } \/* FAQ *\/ .faq-item { border-top: 1px solid var(--rule); padding: 22px 0; } .faq-item:last-of-type { border-bottom: 1px solid var(--rule); } .faq-q { font-size: 17px; font-weight: 600; color: var(--navy); margin-bottom: 8px !important; } .faq-item p:not(.faq-q) { font-size: 17px; color: var(--text); margin: 0; line-height: 1.75; } \/* \ub9c8\ubb34\ub9ac \ubb38\uc7a5 *\/ p.closing { font-size: 15.5px; color: var(--text); margin: 40px 0 0; padding-top: 32px; border-top: 1px solid var(--rule); } \/* \uc800\uc790 \ubc15\uc2a4 *\/ .author-box { display: flex; align-items: center; gap: 14px; padding-top: 40px; margin-top: 40px; border-top: 1px solid var(--rule); } .author-avatar { width: 56px; height: 56px; border-radius: 50%; object-fit: cover; flex-shrink: 0; align-self: flex-start; } .author-text { flex: 1; } .author-name { font-size: 18px; font-weight: 600; color: var(--navy); } .author-meta { font-size: 13px; color: var(--text); margin-top: 2px; } .author-link { display: inline-block; margin-top: 8px; font-size: 15px; font-weight: 600; color: var(--wine); text-decoration: none; } .author-link:hover { text-decoration: underline; } .author-section-label { font-size: 15px; font-weight: 700; letter-spacing: 1px; text-transform: uppercase; color: var(--muted); margin-bottom: 8px; } .author-detail { font-size: 16px; color: var(--text); line-height: 1.7; margin-bottom: 1px; } @media (max-width: 640px) { body { font-size: 15px; } p { font-size: 15px; } li { font-size: 15px; } .hero { padding: 32px 14px 24px; } .hero h1 { font-size: 22px; } .hero-title { font-size: 22px; } .hero-info { font-size: 12px; } .content { padding: 28px 0 60px; } .toc-nav { margin-left: -14px; margin-right: -14px; border-radius: 0; border-left: none; border-right: none; padding: 12px 4px; margin-bottom: 28px; } .toc-label { font-size: 16px; } .toc-nav ol li { font-size: 14px; padding: 3px 0; } h2 { font-size: 20px; margin: 44px 0 10px; } h3 { font-size: 15px; margin: 24px 0 8px; } .lead-text { font-size: 16px; } .summary-text { font-size: 15px; } .context-text { font-size: 14px; } .formula { flex-direction: column; padding: 16px 12px; } .f-num { font-size: 18px; } th { font-size: 13px; padding: 8px 10px; } td { font-size: 13px; padding: 8px 10px; } .faq-q { font-size: 14px; } .faq-item p:not(.faq-q) { font-size: 14px; } .author-box { display: block; overflow: hidden; } .author-avatar { float: left; width: 36px; height: 36px; margin-right: 10px; border-radius: 50%; } .author-section-label { display: inline; font-size: 11px; letter-spacing: 0; margin: 0 3px 0 0; } .author-name { display: inline; font-size: 14px; } .author-detail { clear: both; font-size: 13px; line-height: 1.55; margin-top: 8px; margin-bottom: 1px; } .author-detail ~ .author-detail { clear: none; margin-top: 2px; } .author-link { clear: both; display: block; font-size: 13px; margin-top: 8px; } p.closing { font-size: 14px; } }<\/style>\n<div class=\"hero\">\n  <span class=\"category-tag\">Civil Law \u00b7 Gift Contracts<\/span><\/p>\n<div class=\"hero-title\">Unwritten Gifts with a Burden in South Korea<br \/>Can the Donor Still Cancel?<\/div>\n<div class=\"hero-meta\">\n<div class=\"hero-info\">\n      <strong>Soyoung Park<\/strong> \u00b7 Representative Attorney, Atlas Legal<br \/>\n      Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983 &nbsp;\u00b7&nbsp; appeal dismissed\n    <\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"content\">\n<div class=\"direct-answer\">\n    <strong>Key answer:<\/strong> Under South Korean law, a donor who did not put the intention to give in writing may, as a rule, cancel the gift (Article 555 of the Korean Civil Act). But where the gift is subject to a burden and the donee has fully performed that burden, the donor cannot cancel it for lack of a writing, even before ownership has been transferred, unless the burden was merely ceremonial or nominal or there are similar special circumstances (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).\n  <\/div>\n<div class=\"toc-nav\">\n<p class=\"toc-label\">Contents<\/p>\n<ol>\n<li><a href=\"#sec-1\">1. What happened in this case?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sec-2\">2. Can an unwritten gift always be canceled under Korean law?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sec-3\">3. Why did the Supreme Court of Korea refuse to allow cancellation?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sec-4\">4. How have other Korean courts applied this rule?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sec-5\">5. What if the burden is trivial, or is not really a burden?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sec-6\">6. What if the donee fails to perform the burden?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sec-7\">7. What should donors and donees do?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sec-8\">8. What does this mean for foreign residents and businesses in IFEZ?<\/a><\/li>\n<li><a href=\"#sec-9\">9. Frequently asked questions<\/a><\/li>\n<\/ol><\/div>\n<p class=\"lead-text\">In a village in Eumseong County, North Chungcheong Province, a landowner said around a village meeting in the summer of 2016 that the land under the village hall would be handed over to the village association (maeul-hoe, a community association of local residents). As the landowner directed, the association paid KRW 3 million to the landowner&#8217;s aunt, who could no longer farm nearby. No written contract was made. The landowner later refused to transfer title and sued to have the structures removed and the land returned.<\/p>\n<p class=\"summary-text\">The landowner relied on Article 555 of the Korean Civil Act, which allows either party to cancel a gift if the intention to give was not expressed in writing. Before registration, an oral gift can generally be canceled. The problem was that the association had already paid the KRW 3 million it promised. The Supreme Court of Korea held that where the donee has performed the burden first, the gift cannot be canceled for lack of a writing, and it gave four reasons (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/p>\n<p class=\"context-text\">This article reviews the lead case, the appellate and first-instance judgments, the Supreme Court precedents the Court relied on, and six later trial and appellate decisions that applied the rule, all checked against the original judgment texts.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"sec-1\">What happened in this case?<\/h2>\n<p class=\"lead-text\">We refer to the landowner as the plaintiff and the village association as the defendant. The first-instance court found the following facts (Cheongju District Court, Chungju Branch, September 24, 2020, 2019Gadan23049 (main claim)).<\/p>\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th>Date<\/th>\n<th>Event<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Around March 2, 1995<\/td>\n<td>A sale contract stated that about 50 pyeong (a traditional Korean unit of area) would be offered &#8220;as a service to the village.&#8221; The court treated this as a loan for use under which the plaintiff&#8217;s father let the association use the village hall site free of charge<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>2007<\/td>\n<td>The plaintiff received the land as a gift from the plaintiff&#8217;s father<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Around February 2016<\/td>\n<td>Another plot was discussed as the site for a senior center, and a plan was discussed for the association to pay the plaintiff&#8217;s aunt, who was farming that plot. The plot proved unsuitable, and the village hall site on the plaintiff&#8217;s land was discussed instead<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>July 4, 2016<\/td>\n<td>Around a village meeting, the plaintiff expressed the intention to transfer the village hall site and agreed to a survey and subdivision registration. The same day, the association transferred KRW 3 million to the aunt&#8217;s bank account<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>July 8 to 21, 2016<\/td>\n<td>The plaintiff ordered a cadastral survey at the association&#8217;s expense; the survey was carried out around July 18 and the subdivision of the village hall site was registered on July 21<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Later<\/td>\n<td>Without transferring title, the plaintiff sued for removal of structures and return of the land. The association counterclaimed for registration of the ownership transfer<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>The first-instance court found that around July 4, 2016, the plaintiff gave the village hall site to the association subject to a burden: the association was to pay KRW 3 million to the aunt designated by the plaintiff. It held that participation in a senior center (gyeongnodang) support program was only the motive for the gift, not a condition. Noting that the plaintiff raised no objection to the payment at the time, and that after receiving the money the aunt stopped farming the original plot, which the plaintiff now farms, the court found the KRW 3 million to be a burden attached to the gift. It dismissed the plaintiff&#8217;s claim and ordered the plaintiff to register the ownership transfer to the association (Cheongju District Court, Chungju Branch, September 24, 2020, 2019Gadan23049 (main claim)). The appellate court and the Supreme Court reached the same result (Cheongju District Court, November 11, 2021, 2020Na16588 (main claim) and 2020Na16595 (counterclaim); Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/p>\n<p>The plaintiff also lost on a separate road portion of the land. The plaintiff appealed that part to the Supreme Court as well, but stated no specific grounds, so the Supreme Court did not address it (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"sec-2\">Can an unwritten gift always be canceled under Korean law?<\/h2>\n<p class=\"lead-text\">As a rule, yes. Article 555 of the Korean Civil Act allows either party to cancel a gift if the intention to give was not expressed in writing. Article 558 provides that such a cancellation does not affect any part already performed. For a gift subject to a burden, the rules on bilateral contracts also apply (Article 561).<\/p>\n<h3>Why does Korean law require a writing?<\/h3>\n<p>The Supreme Court of Korea has explained that Article 555 aims to prevent donors from giving rashly and to make the donor&#8217;s intention clear so as to avoid later disputes (Supreme Court of Korea, September 27, 1988, 86Daka2634). The document does not have to be a gift contract. It is enough if the donor&#8217;s intention to give property to the other party appears clearly in writing. Even a document not worded as a gift contract counts if, considering how it came to be written, it expresses the intention to give (Supreme Court of Korea, April 11, 2003, 2003Da1755). A deed of sale that disguised a gift has been accepted as a writing (Supreme Court of Korea, September 27, 1988, 86Daka2634).<\/p>\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th>Situation<\/th>\n<th>Court&#8217;s view<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Deed of sale that was in substance a gift instrument<\/td>\n<td>Counts as a writing (Supreme Court of Korea, September 27, 1988, 86Daka2634)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>No writing at the time of the gift, but one was made later while the contract was still in force<\/td>\n<td>From that point the gift is in writing and cannot be freely canceled (Supreme Court of Korea, May 9, 1989, 88Daka2271)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Church session resolution signed by the donor as clerk<\/td>\n<td>Hard to see as a writing expressing donative intent between the parties (Supreme Court of Korea, September 24, 2009, 2009Da37831)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Father&#8217;s text message promising an apartment to his son<\/td>\n<td>Not a writing under Article 555 (first instance, Suwon District Court, November 29, 2023, 2023Gadan510741)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>The writing must be expressed to the donee, and for gifts that may be made on impulse, such as donations to religious organizations, courts examine the writing requirement strictly (Supreme Court of Korea, September 24, 2009, 2009Da37831).<\/p>\n<h3>Is there a deadline to cancel?<\/h3>\n<p>Cancellation under Article 555 is a special kind of withdrawal rather than cancellation in the ordinary sense, so the limitation period for rights of formation does not apply (Supreme Court of Korea, April 11, 2003, 2003Da1755). The Court has held that a cancellation made more than 10 years after the gift was in principle valid (Supreme Court of Korea, September 24, 2009, 2009Da37831).<\/p>\n<h3>What counts as &#8220;already performed&#8221;?<\/h3>\n<p>For a gift of real estate, delivering the property is not enough; performance means the ownership transfer registration has been completed (Supreme Court of Korea, June 14, 2012, 2011Da56873). A gift of land is performed when the documents needed for registration are provided at the donor&#8217;s will and the transfer is registered in the donee&#8217;s name. Registration that does not reflect the donor&#8217;s will is not valid performance (Supreme Court of Korea, September 24, 2009, 2009Da37831).<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>If the donor provided the registration documents while alive, the gift is treated as performed even if registration was completed after the donor&#8217;s death, and the heirs&#8217; cancellation does not affect it (Supreme Court of Korea, September 18, 2001, 2001Da29643).<\/li>\n<li>If only part of a share was registered before the donor died, the heirs cannot cancel the registered part but may cancel the unregistered part (Supreme Court of Korea, April 11, 2003, 2003Da1755).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>In this case the plaintiff never transferred title to the village hall site. Had the gift carried no burden, it would in principle have been open to cancellation as an unperformed gift. The question was how to treat the KRW 3 million burden the association had already performed.<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"sec-3\">Why did the Supreme Court of Korea refuse to allow cancellation?<\/h2>\n<p class=\"lead-text\">The Court first confirmed that the general gift provisions apply to gifts subject to a burden, so either party may in principle cancel such a gift under Article 555 if it was not in writing. But it held that the position changes once the donee has completed the burden (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/p>\n<p>The Court held that even if the donor has not yet performed, once the donee has fully performed the burden, neither party may cancel the gift, in whole or in part, on the ground that it was not in writing, unless there are special circumstances showing that it was in substance the same as a gift without a burden, for example because the burden was merely ceremonial or nominal or required no particular effort or cost (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/p>\n<p>It gave four reasons (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li><strong>1. The special nature of gifts with a burden<\/strong> \u2014 The rules on bilateral contracts apply (Article 561), and the donor bears warranty liability like a seller to the extent of the burden (Article 559(2)). The Civil Act treats such gifts differently from gifts without a burden and seeks fairness between donor and donee in how the contract is performed and ended.<\/li>\n<li><strong>2. A burden already performed<\/strong> \u2014 A burden the donee has already performed is part of what has been &#8220;already performed&#8221; under Article 558. If the donor could freely cancel, the donor could keep the benefit of the donee&#8217;s performance without any effort, which would be unjust.<\/li>\n<li><strong>3. Legal certainty<\/strong> \u2014 Cancellation under Article 555 is a special kind of withdrawal, different from cancellation for the donee&#8217;s ingratitude (Article 556) or a change in the donor&#8217;s finances (Article 557). Allowing a donor to cancel freely when there has been no default or change of circumstances, and the donee has relied on the gift and fully performed, would undermine legal certainty (Supreme Court of Korea, April 11, 2003, 2003Da1755).<\/li>\n<li><strong>4. The purpose of Article 555<\/strong> \u2014 The provision aims to prevent rash gifts and clarify the donor&#8217;s intention (Supreme Court of Korea, September 27, 1988, 86Daka2634). In a gift with a burden, the donee&#8217;s performance is part of what the parties agreed, so a rash or unclear gift is less likely, especially once the burden has been performed.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>How did this differ from the appellate court?<\/h3>\n<p>The appellate court also rejected cancellation, but briefly. It reasoned from the Supreme Court rule that a donor may cancel when the donee fails to perform the burden even after the gift has been performed (Supreme Court of Korea, July 8, 1997, 97Da2177) and, applying that rule in reverse together with the principle of fairness, held that a donor cannot cancel after the donee has performed first (Cheongju District Court, November 11, 2021, 2020Na16588 (main claim) and 2020Na16595 (counterclaim)). The Supreme Court said the appellate court&#8217;s reasoning was somewhat insufficient but its conclusion was correct, and set out the four reasons itself (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"sec-4\">How have other Korean courts applied this rule?<\/h2>\n<p class=\"lead-text\">Later decisions cite the lead case directly. In the decisions we reviewed, two questions decided the outcome: whether what the donee did was a burden that formed part of the contract, and whether that burden was actually performed in full.<\/p>\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th>Decision<\/th>\n<th>What the donee did<\/th>\n<th>Result<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Daejeon District Court, Hongseong Branch, April 21, 2023, 2022Gadan37045<\/td>\n<td>Withdrew a divorce suit and a criminal complaint<\/td>\n<td>Burden performed; no cancellation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Uijeongbu District Court, September 26, 2023, 2022Na216252 (main claim) and 2022Na216399 (counterclaim)<\/td>\n<td>Let the donor (a Saemaeul community association) use another building site for a substantial period<\/td>\n<td>Burden performed; no cancellation<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Seoul High Court, May 22, 2024, 2024Na2002003<\/td>\n<td>Shared property tax and paid half of a rent<\/td>\n<td>Ceremonial payment, not a burden; cancellation upheld<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Suwon District Court, November 29, 2023, 2023Gadan510741<\/td>\n<td>Handed over registration documents for the sale of an inherited building<\/td>\n<td>Performance of the donee&#8217;s own duty, not a burden; cancellation upheld<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Daegu District Court, Gyeongju Branch, May 27, 2026, 2026Gadan1094<\/td>\n<td>Withdrew an objection in a registration procedure<\/td>\n<td>A condition, not a burden; cancellation upheld<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>In the Hongseong case, a wife had sued her husband for divorce and filed a criminal complaint. The husband agreed that if she withdrew both, he would transfer real estate to their son. She withdrew them and later died. When the son sued for registration, the husband canceled the gift in his answer as an unwritten gift. The court treated the agreement as a gift with a burden in the form of a contract for the benefit of a third party, held that the burden had been fully performed, and ordered the transfer (Daejeon District Court, Hongseong Branch, April 21, 2023, 2022Gadan37045).<\/p>\n<p>In the Uijeongbu case, a Saemaeul community association gave a building on the terms that the donee would let the association use another building for some time. The court held that by letting the association use that site for a substantial period, the donee had completed the burden, so the association could not cancel (Uijeongbu District Court, September 26, 2023, 2022Na216252 (main claim) and 2022Na216399 (counterclaim)).<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"sec-5\">What if the burden is trivial, or is not really a burden?<\/h2>\n<p class=\"lead-text\">Then the gift can still be canceled. The lead case excludes burdens that are merely ceremonial or nominal or require no particular effort or cost (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983). More fundamentally, the rule does not apply if what the donee did was never a burden in the first place.<\/p>\n<p>For a performance by the donee to be a burden attached to the gift, the parties must have agreed to make it part of the contract. The mere fact that the donor expected something in return does not make it a burden; it remains a motive for the gift (Seoul High Court, May 22, 2024, 2024Na2002003; Daejeon District Court, June 25, 2026, 2025Gadan207304).<\/p>\n<p>In the Seoul High Court case, one heir orally promised another the half of an apartment&#8217;s sale proceeds minus KRW 100 million. The promisee argued that sharing property tax and paying half of a house rent were burdens the promisee had performed. The court found no agreement making these part of the contract, noted that the promisor had also paid half of the apartment&#8217;s larger rent, and treated the payments as a ceremonial expression of gratitude. Even if there had been a burden, its content could not be identified, so performance was not shown, and the cancellation by brief was valid (Seoul High Court, May 22, 2024, 2024Na2002003).<\/p>\n<p>In the Suwon case, after the mother&#8217;s death, the son had said he would not sign the documents for the sale of a building his parents co-owned if the estate were divided only by statutory shares. The father then texted him promising an apartment, and the son delivered the documents to the judicial scrivener&#8217;s office handling the registration the same day. The court held that the text was not a writing under Article 555 and that, as an heir who had inherited the seller&#8217;s position, the son was already obliged to deliver the documents, so doing so was not performance of a burden. Even if it were, special circumstances made the gift in substance one without a burden, so the father&#8217;s cancellation in his answer stood (Suwon District Court, November 29, 2023, 2023Gadan510741).<\/p>\n<p>In the Gyeongju case, a person promised a half share of land if a co-heir withdrew an objection to a registration. The court held that the withdrawal was a condition precedent to the gift rather than a binding obligation imposed by the donor, so the gift was not one subject to a burden and could be canceled even though the objection had been withdrawn (Daegu District Court, Gyeongju Branch, May 27, 2026, 2026Gadan1094).<\/p>\n<p>The KRW 3 million in the lead case was different. The first-instance court found that it was a burden imposing a payment obligation on the association (Cheongju District Court, Chungju Branch, September 24, 2020, 2019Gadan23049 (main claim)), and the Supreme Court upheld the conclusion that the association, having fully performed it, was protected from cancellation (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"sec-6\">What if the donee fails to perform the burden?<\/h2>\n<p class=\"lead-text\">The donor may cancel the gift, even after transferring ownership. Because the rules on bilateral contracts apply, a donor may cancel a gift subject to a burden when the donee fails to perform the burden even if the gift has already been performed, and Articles 555 and 558 do not apply (Supreme Court of Korea, July 8, 1997, 97Da2177).<\/p>\n<p>In that case, a donor gave forest land to a school foundation in 1985 on the terms that her husband would be appointed chairman of the board, two sons would be hired, and the foundation would bear the related taxes. When the foundation failed to perform and denied the burden altogether, the Supreme Court held that the donor could cancel the gift even though she had already registered the transfer (Supreme Court of Korea, July 8, 1997, 97Da2177).<\/p>\n<p>A donor may also cancel for the donee&#8217;s ingratitude, but the two routes differ. Cancellation for ingratitude is limited by Article 556(2) and Article 558, while cancellation for failure to perform the burden is not, including where family members owing statutory support make support the burden of a gift (Supreme Court of Korea, July 26, 2007, 2007Da24602).<\/p>\n<table>\n<thead>\n<tr>\n<th>Ground<\/th>\n<th>Basis<\/th>\n<th>Part already performed<\/th>\n<th>Time limit<\/th>\n<\/tr>\n<\/thead>\n<tbody>\n<tr>\n<td>Gift not in writing<\/td>\n<td>Civil Act Art. 555<\/td>\n<td>Not affected (Art. 558)<\/td>\n<td>No limitation period (Supreme Court of Korea, April 11, 2003, 2003Da1755)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Donee&#8217;s crime or failure to provide support<\/td>\n<td>Civil Act Art. 556<\/td>\n<td>Not affected (Art. 558)<\/td>\n<td>Lapses six months after learning of the ground, or on forgiveness (Art. 556(2))<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Significant change in the donor&#8217;s finances<\/td>\n<td>Civil Act Art. 557<\/td>\n<td>Not affected (Art. 558)<\/td>\n<td>\u2014<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<tr>\n<td>Donee&#8217;s failure to perform the burden<\/td>\n<td>Civil Act Art. 561<\/td>\n<td>May be canceled even after performance (Supreme Court of Korea, July 8, 1997, 97Da2177)<\/td>\n<td>Art. 556(2) does not apply (Supreme Court of Korea, July 26, 2007, 2007Da24602)<\/td>\n<\/tr>\n<\/tbody>\n<\/table>\n<p>A recent trial decision reached the same result. An elderly father certified as needing long-term care gave rented property to his daughter. The gift contract mentioned only her assumption of mortgage and deposit debts, but a notarized confirmation signed at the same time stated that title would go to her alone on the condition that she support her father. After registration she moved out and stopped supporting him, and he canceled the gift by certified letter. The Daejeon District Court treated support as the burden, upheld the cancellation, and ordered the registration canceled in exchange for the father reassuming the debts she had taken on (Daejeon District Court, June 25, 2026, 2025Gadan207304).<\/p>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"sec-7\">What should donors and donees do?<\/h2>\n<p class=\"lead-text\">Atlas Legal reviewed the lead case and related decisions and summarizes the practical points for unwritten gifts below.<\/p>\n<h3>If you are the donor<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Decide before letting the donee perform the burden. Once the donee has performed, cancellation is generally barred even without a writing (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/li>\n<li>If you wish to cancel, say so clearly. Simply disputing the other side&#8217;s claim in court is not an assertion of cancellation (Supreme Court of Korea, May 9, 1989, 88Daka2271). In the trial decisions above, cancellation was accepted when stated in an answer or brief served on the other party (Seoul High Court, May 22, 2024, 2024Na2002003; Suwon District Court, November 29, 2023, 2023Gadan510741; Daegu District Court, Gyeongju Branch, May 27, 2026, 2026Gadan1094).<\/li>\n<li>If you expect something such as support in return, write it into the contract. A mere expectation is only a motive, not a burden (Daejeon District Court, June 25, 2026, 2025Gadan207304). A written burden lets you cancel even after registration if it is not performed (Supreme Court of Korea, July 8, 1997, 97Da2177).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<h3>If you are the donee<\/h3>\n<ul>\n<li>Keep evidence of performance. In the lead case, the bank transfer, a receipt, and the survey and subdivision registration paid for by the association together supported the finding of a gift with a burden and its performance (Cheongju District Court, Chungju Branch, September 24, 2020, 2019Gadan23049 (main claim)).<\/li>\n<li>Obtain a writing if you can. A writing made later still bars free cancellation from that point (Supreme Court of Korea, May 9, 1989, 88Daka2271), and it must be expressed to the donee (Supreme Court of Korea, September 24, 2009, 2009Da37831).<\/li>\n<li>For real estate, performance is complete only on registration of the transfer, not on delivery (Supreme Court of Korea, June 14, 2012, 2011Da56873). If the donor delays, you may sue for registration, as the association did by counterclaim here (Cheongju District Court, Chungju Branch, September 24, 2020, 2019Gadan23049 (main claim); Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/li>\n<li>A gift promised only by text message was not treated as a writing in one decision (Suwon District Court, November 29, 2023, 2023Gadan510741).<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"sec-8\">What does this mean for foreign residents and businesses in IFEZ?<\/h2>\n<p class=\"lead-text\">Foreign nationals and foreign-invested companies in the Incheon Free Economic Zone (IFEZ), including Songdo International Business District, Cheongna International City, and Yeongjong International City, may give or receive property in South Korea on informal terms, for example within a family, to a community or religious organization, or between business partners.<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>A promise that is not in writing can generally be canceled under Korean law until it is performed, and a text message may not be enough (Suwon District Court, November 29, 2023, 2023Gadan510741).<\/li>\n<li>If something is expected in return, make it an express burden in the contract. Once the donee has fully performed a real burden, the donor generally cannot cancel the gift (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/li>\n<li>Keep bank records, receipts and other objective proof of what each side did and when.<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p><\/p>\n<h2 id=\"sec-9\">Frequently asked questions<\/h2>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q. Is an oral gift legally binding in South Korea?<\/p>\n<p>A. Yes, a gift contract is formed when one party expresses an intention to give property to the other free of charge and the other party accepts (Article 554 of the Korean Civil Act). However, if the intention to make the gift was not expressed in writing, either party may cancel it (Article 555), and the cancellation does not affect any part that has already been performed (Article 558).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q. Can a donor cancel an unwritten gift with a burden after the donee has fully performed the burden?<\/p>\n<p>A. As a rule, no. The Supreme Court of Korea held that even if the donor has not yet performed, once the donee has completed the burden, neither party may cancel the gift for lack of a writing, unless there are special circumstances showing that the gift was in substance a gift without a burden, for example because the burden was merely ceremonial or nominal or required no particular effort or cost (Supreme Court of Korea, September 29, 2022, 2021Da299976, 299983).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q. Does a text message promising a gift count as a gift in writing under Korean law?<\/p>\n<p>A. One Korean trial court said no. The Suwon District Court accepted that a father&#8217;s text message promising an apartment to his son was an electronic document, but held that a written expression of donative intent under Article 555 is, by its nature, not something that can be made in electronic form, and it upheld the father&#8217;s cancellation (Suwon District Court, November 29, 2023, 2023Gadan510741). We did not find a Supreme Court decision on this point.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q. When is a gift of real estate considered performed in South Korea?<\/p>\n<p>A. When the transfer of ownership is registered. Handing over possession of the property is not enough; the ownership transfer registration must be completed (Supreme Court of Korea, June 14, 2012, 2011Da56873). If the donor provided the documents needed for registration while alive, the gift is treated as performed even if the registration was completed after the donor&#8217;s death (Supreme Court of Korea, September 18, 2001, 2001Da29643).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q. Can an unwritten gift still be canceled more than 10 years later?<\/p>\n<p>A. In principle, yes. Cancellation under Article 555 is a special kind of withdrawal rather than cancellation in the ordinary sense, so the limitation period for rights of formation does not apply, and a cancellation made more than 10 years later is in principle valid (Supreme Court of Korea, April 11, 2003, 2003Da1755; Supreme Court of Korea, September 24, 2009, 2009Da37831). The cancellation still does not affect any part already performed (Article 558).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q. If the donee fails to perform the burden, can the donor cancel even after ownership has been transferred?<\/p>\n<p>A. Yes. Because the rules on bilateral contracts apply to a gift subject to a burden, the donor may cancel the gift when the donee fails to perform the burden even if the gift has already been performed, and Articles 555 and 558 do not apply in that case (Supreme Court of Korea, July 8, 1997, 97Da2177; Supreme Court of Korea, July 26, 2007, 2007Da24602).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q. Does simply denying the other side&#8217;s claim in court amount to canceling the gift?<\/p>\n<p>A. No. Cancellation of an unwritten gift may be implied, but merely disputing the other party&#8217;s allegations in court is different from asserting cancellation as an independent defense (Supreme Court of Korea, May 9, 1989, 88Daka2271). A donor who wishes to cancel should state that clearly, for example in an answer or a brief.<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<div class=\"faq-item\">\n<p class=\"faq-q\">Q. What should foreign residents and businesses in IFEZ take from this decision?<\/p>\n<p>A. Anyone who receives or makes a gift of Korean property with conditions attached should put the gift and the burden in writing and keep proof of performance. In the lead case, bank transfer records, a receipt and a survey paid for by the donee helped the courts find that a gift subject to a burden existed and that the burden had been performed (Cheongju District Court, Chungju Branch, September 24, 2020, 2019Gadan23049 (main claim)).<\/p>\n<\/div>\n<p class=\"closing\">This article summarizes Korean court decisions on canceling unwritten gifts subject to a burden based on published judgments and is not legal advice for any particular case. For the first-instance decisions discussed, we could not confirm any appellate ruling. Whether something is a burden and whether it was fully performed depends on the facts, so please consult Atlas Legal about your specific situation.<\/p>\n<div class=\"author-box\">\n    <img decoding=\"async\" class=\"author-avatar\" src=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/12\/\ubc15\uc18c\uc601-1.png\" alt=\"Soyoung Park, Representative Attorney \u2014 Atlas Legal\"><\/p>\n<div class=\"author-text\">\n<div class=\"author-section-label\">About the Author<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-name\">Soyoung Park | Representative Attorney<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-detail\">Family Law, Inheritance, Construction &amp; Real Estate Disputes<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-detail\">Judicial Research and Training Institute, 33rd Class<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-detail\">Korea University, Department of Law<\/div>\n<div class=\"author-detail\">Atlas Legal | Incheon Songdo, South Korea<\/div>\n<p>      <a class=\"author-link\" href=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\" target=\"_blank\" rel=\"noopener noreferrer\">Visit Atlas Legal Homepage \u2192<\/a>\n    <\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>South Korea&#8217;s Supreme Court held that once a donee fully performs the burden attached to a gift, the donor cannot cancel it merely for lack of a writing.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_kad_post_transparent":"","_kad_post_title":"","_kad_post_layout":"","_kad_post_sidebar_id":"","_kad_post_content_style":"","_kad_post_vertical_padding":"","_kad_post_feature":"","_kad_post_feature_position":"","_kad_post_header":false,"_kad_post_footer":false,"_kad_post_classname":"","footnotes":""},"categories":[17],"tags":[994,991,993,995,992],"class_list":["post-2076","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-civil","tag-gift-cancellation","tag-gift-with-a-burden","tag-korean-civil-act-article-555","tag-real-estate-gift","tag-unwritten-gift"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v28.7 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>Unwritten Gift Cancellation in South Korea | Atlas Legal<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"South Korea&#039;s Supreme Court held that once a donee fully performs the burden attached to a gift, the donor cannot cancel it merely for lack of a writing.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Unwritten Gift Cancellation in South Korea | Atlas Legal\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"South Korea&#039;s Supreme Court held that once a donee fully performs the burden attached to a gift, the donor cannot cancel it merely for lack of a writing.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Atlas Legal Blog\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-10-04T12:48:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2026-10-05T08:30:36+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/cropped-\uc2ac\ub77c\uc774\ub4dc6-1.png\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"22 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55\"},\"headline\":\"Unwritten Gifts with a Burden in South Korea: Can the Donor Still Cancel?\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-04T12:48:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-10-05T08:30:36+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":4404,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#organization\"},\"keywords\":[\"gift cancellation\",\"gift with a burden\",\"Korean Civil Act Article 555\",\"real estate gift\",\"unwritten gift\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Civil\\\/Administrative\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\\\/\",\"name\":\"Unwritten Gift Cancellation in South Korea | Atlas Legal\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2026-10-04T12:48:51+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2026-10-05T08:30:36+00:00\",\"description\":\"South Korea's Supreme Court held that once a donee fully performs the burden attached to a gift, the donor cannot cancel it merely for lack of a writing.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"\ud648\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Unwritten Gifts with a Burden in South Korea: Can the Donor Still Cancel?\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal English Blog\",\"description\":\"\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Atlas Legal English Blog\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/sites\\\/3\\\/2025\\\/09\\\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png\",\"width\":540,\"height\":485,\"caption\":\"Atlas Legal English Blog\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/logo\\\/image\\\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55\",\"name\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/atlaw.kr\\\/en-blog\\\/author\\\/prinz001\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Unwritten Gift Cancellation in South Korea | Atlas Legal","description":"South Korea's Supreme Court held that once a donee fully performs the burden attached to a gift, the donor cannot cancel it merely for lack of a writing.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Unwritten Gift Cancellation in South Korea | Atlas Legal","og_description":"South Korea's Supreme Court held that once a donee fully performs the burden attached to a gift, the donor cannot cancel it merely for lack of a writing.","og_url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/","og_site_name":"Atlas Legal Blog","article_published_time":"2026-10-04T12:48:51+00:00","article_modified_time":"2026-10-05T08:30:36+00:00","og_image":[{"url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/01\/cropped-\uc2ac\ub77c\uc774\ub4dc6-1.png","type":"","width":"","height":""}],"author":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","Est. reading time":"22 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/"},"author":{"name":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/person\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55"},"headline":"Unwritten Gifts with a Burden in South Korea: Can the Donor Still Cancel?","datePublished":"2026-10-04T12:48:51+00:00","dateModified":"2026-10-05T08:30:36+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/"},"wordCount":4404,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#organization"},"keywords":["gift cancellation","gift with a burden","Korean Civil Act Article 555","real estate gift","unwritten gift"],"articleSection":["Civil\/Administrative"],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/","name":"Unwritten Gift Cancellation in South Korea | Atlas Legal","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#website"},"datePublished":"2026-10-04T12:48:51+00:00","dateModified":"2026-10-05T08:30:36+00:00","description":"South Korea's Supreme Court held that once a donee fully performs the burden attached to a gift, the donor cannot cancel it merely for lack of a writing.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/onerous-gift-unwritten-revocation-south-korea\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"\ud648","item":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Unwritten Gifts with a Burden in South Korea: Can the Donor Still Cancel?"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/","name":"Atlas Legal English Blog","description":"","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#organization","name":"Atlas Legal English Blog","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2025\/09\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/sites\/3\/2025\/09\/\ud3f4\ub354-\uc0c1\ub2e8-\uc9c1\uc0ac\uac01\ud615.png","width":540,"height":485,"caption":"Atlas Legal English Blog"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/#\/schema\/person\/184bcdecc06f89fd6c36b29781165b55","name":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/f03bca99acfafded0c4fa1b01dee8839b10f831ccba39db4d9dc175f44d3d640?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"\ubc95\ubb34\ubc95\uc778 \uc544\ud2c0\ub77c\uc2a4"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/atlaw.kr"],"url":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/author\/prinz001\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2076","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=2076"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2076\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":2079,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/2076\/revisions\/2079"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=2076"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=2076"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/atlaw.kr\/en-blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=2076"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}