B

Family Agreement Log for Inheritance Dispute Prevention

3.50

Derivation Chain

Step 1 AI data depletion — unstructured decision-making within families
→
Step 2 The problem of inheritance disputes after parents' death for those in their 50s
→
Step 3 The lack of tools to record and share family agreements before disputes arise

Competitor references

No usable source links are available for this idea. Its signal notes and scores need independent verification.

Problem

People in their 50s experience conflicts among siblings over inheritance of elderly parents' assets (real estate, deposits, insurance). Verbal agreements made during parents' lifetime are often denied after death ('I never said that'), escalating into legal disputes. Lawyer consultations cost 300,000 to 500,000 KRW per session (approximately $225 to $375), and there is no tool to record sensitive family conversations, leaving no documents that can be used as evidence.

Solution

Provides a web-based 'Family Agreement Log' accessible jointly by family members. Input parent asset list → draft distribution plan → each member gives electronic consent (identity verification) → timestamped record. While not legally binding, it serves as reference material to prove intent of agreement in future disputes. Also provides guidance for notarization.

Target: Aged 48-58, with at least 2 siblings, parents alive in their 70s or older, and parents own real estate or financial assets.
Revenue Model: Basic agreement records free (up to 3), unlimited records + notary office connection + PDF notarization document generation Premium Plan at 5,000 KRW per month (approximately $3.75).
Ecosystem Role: Regulation
MVP Estimate: 2_weeks

NUMR-V Scores

N Novelty
4.0/5
U Urgency
4.0/5
M Market
3.0/5
R Realizability
3.0/5
V Validation
3.0/5
NUMR-V Scoring System
N Novelty1-5How uncommon the service is in market context.
U Urgency1-5How urgently users need this problem solved now.
M Market1-5Market size and growth potential from proxy indicators.
R Realizability1-5Buildability for a small team with realistic constraints.
V Validation1-5Validation signal quality from competition and demand data.
Each dimension is scored 1-5 and weighted into grade S/A/B/C/D.
N=.15 U=.20 M=.15 R=.30 V=.20

Feasibility (63%)

Tech Complexity
24.0/40
Data Availability
19.4/25
MVP Timeline
20.0/20
API Bonus
0.0/15
Feasibility Breakdown
Tech Complexity/ 40Difficulty of core implementation stack.
Data Availability/ 25Practical availability and cost of required data.
MVP Timeline/ 20Expected time to ship a usable MVP.
API Bonus/ 15Bonus for viable public API leverage.
Total 100 points; below 50% is filtered out.

Market Validation (50/100)

Competition
8.0/20
Market Demand
6.2/20
Timing
14.0/20
Revenue Signals
7.5/15
Pick-Axe Fit
7.5/15
Solo Buildability
7.0/10
Validation Breakdown
Competition/ 20Signal quality from competitor landscape.
Market Demand/ 20Demand proxies from search and mention patterns.
Timing/ 20Fit with current shifts in tech, behavior, and regulation.
Revenue Signals/ 15Reference evidence for monetization viability.
Pick-Axe Fit/ 15How well the concept serves participants in a trend.
Solo Buildability/ 10Practicality for lean-team implementation.
Total 100 points; below 50 is filtered out.

Technical Requirements

Backend [medium] Frontend [medium]
Dashboard