On The The Judicial Determination Of The Scope Of Estate And The Settlement Of Estate Debt ——Take Hu Mou V.Wang Mou,Zhu Mou 1 As An Example

With the continuous development of China’s socialist market economy and the continuous advancement of building a moderately prosperous society in an all-round way,people in the economic and social exchanges are increasingly close,accompanied by these exchanges,various disputes also come one after another.In the face of many disputes,the regulatory role of law and its importance are more prominent.In May 2020,China officially adopted the Civil Code of the People’s Republic of China（hereinafter referred to as the Civil Code）.The sixth chapter of the Civil Code is the Part of Succession,which is an important part of the Civil Code.The new Inheritance Part of the Civil Code has further modified and improved the original Inheritance Law,among which,legal provisions such as "administrator of estate" have been added.However,part of the provisions only make general and principled stipulations about who should pay off the legacy debts and how to pay off the debts.It can be seen that even though the Civil Code has been revised and further improved,there are still some deficiencies in the description of the settlement of inheritance debt.People are affected by various economic relations in their daily life,and the relationship between creditor and debt has become complicated.If this series of problems cannot be properly solved,it is bound to affect the harmony and stability of the society.Based on the above reasons,this paper takes the case of debt settlement dispute between Hu and Wang and Zhu as an example,and tries to analyze the dispute focus of this case:1.Whether the insurance compensation of 200,000 yuan belongs to the scope of the estate;2,whether Zhu’s debt should be recognized as the common debt of the family;3.Whether the Appellant Wang and the Appellant Zhu 1,Zhu 2,Zhu 3 should bear the liability of repayment;Using the current laws and regulations,judicial interpretation,legal theory analysis,draw the conclusion: 200000 yuan of insurance compensation do not belong to the scope of heritage,Zhu Mou hin debt should not be regarded as family common debt,should belong to the joint debt,the appellant wang mou shall bear the liability,the appellant Zhu Mou 1,2,3don’t pay responsibility Zhu Mou Zhu Mou.Finally,the author takes this case as a starting point to sort out the deficiency of the current inheritance debt settlement system in China and the dilemma of the definition of common debt,and puts forward specific solutions at the legislative and judicial levels.