북한 민법상 권리변동의 원인

Abstract

This paper, as causes of rights changes in North Korean Civil Law, examines the causes of the changes of the Juristic Acts, a Real Right, and a Claim, which are stated as express terms in the North Korean Civil Law, as well as legal requirements, legal facts and the North Korean Civil Law. Based on this examination, this study ultimately suggests 'The Unification Plan on the Civil Law in South and North Korea', by comparing and examining Civil Law of South and North Korea in regard to the causes of changes in rights. There are similarities between Civil Law of South Korea and North Korea as below. Both Civil Law of South and North Korea accept the legal facts and legal requirements as cause of the changes in rights. The point that both consider the Juristic Acts as main cause. The point that the reasons for the change of rights in the real estate can be sorted into Juristic Acts and others for both South and North Korea. The point that both acknowledge Bona Fide Acquisition in private ownership. The point that both deals with the contract, the unjust gain, the illegal activity(TORTS), as cause for occurrence of a claim. The point that both acknowledge Performance and Deposit, Set-off, Novation, Release, Merger as cause for lapse of a claim. However, the North Korean Civil Law is different from that of South Korea as below. The Civil Law in North Korea emphasizes the political nature in the cause of all the rights, including Juristic Acts. The Civil Law of North Korea applies Extinctive Prescription to private ownership. The point that all Articles without Owners are dealt with the National Treasury, the point that administrative document is treated as the cause of a Claim, the point that the Civil Law of North Korea acknowledge the planned contract, and has general contracts such as savings contracts, which are different from that of the Civil Law of South Korea, and the point that Performance for Illegal Cause is dealt as the National Treasury and et cetera are showing differences from our Civil Law of South Korea. In conclusion, this paper suggests that the cause of changes in rights for The Unification Plan on the Civil Law in South and North Korea should be based on the basic orders of liberal democracy. Those regulations in The North Korean Civil Law that are considered to be violated upon the above and which are politically motivated, should be excluded from being applied. In addition, elements that are similar to each other should be extensively applied to North Korea after reunification, but transitional provisions should be made for elements that differ from each other. The transitional provisions are needed in regard to changes of Rights in Civil Law of South and North Korea, including Extinct Prescription, Possessory Right, Bona Fide Acquisition, and Vesting of Articles without Owners, Management of Affairs, Illegal Activity(TORTS), Self-Defense, Act of Necessity and et cetera.