부부재산관계에 대한 검토 - 부부공동생활의 실태와 새로운 부의 창출에 대응하여
A Review on the Korean Marital Property Regime
0
조회
0
다운로드
12
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The treatment of marital property deals with the regulation of the ownership and management of the spouses. The values of marital property law are community, autonomy, and equality. During marriage,property belongs to the spouse who acquired it, according to the Korean marital property regime. But most marital properties have been acquired, preserved, and improved by the efforts of both spouses on each spouse's property. So most spouses make joint management,control and the decision about their marital properties in reality. Where one of the spouses fails seriously in his or her duties and thus imperils the interests of the family, the family court should forbid that spouse to dispose of his or her own property. The separate property regime at times resulted in unjust marital property distributions at dissolution of the marriage, especially involving cases of the traditional families where most properties were titled in the wage-earning husbands. The flaw of the separate property system is not only that it will occasionally ignore the financial contributions of non-title holding spouse, but also that is unable to take account of a spouse's non-financial contributions. So Korean court adopted the deferred community system by the judicial decisions, using the typical definitions of community property system. It may exemplify the judicial activism. But it need not to distinguish the marital property and non marital property to divide the marital properties. Korean court has discretion on a case-by-case basis to determine the methods and amounts of marital property division to achieve justice, equity and peace of family. Korean law adopted the rule of reasonableness in marital property division. Many modern property rights, especially human capital does not have the attributes traditionally associated with property. In the context of the marital property division, we should respect the reasonable expectations of spouses by accepting the present interests of pensions and employee benefits, stock option, degrees, and goodwill. It may need the amendments of the concerned acts.
Abstract
The treatment of marital property deals with the regulation of the ownership and management of the spouses. The values of marital property law are community, autonomy, and equality. During marriage,property belongs to the spouse who acquired it, according to the Korean marital property regime. But most marital properties have been acquired, preserved, and improved by the efforts of both spouses on each spouse's property. So most spouses make joint management,control and the decision about their marital properties in reality. Where one of the spouses fails seriously in his or her duties and thus imperils the interests of the family, the family court should forbid that spouse to dispose of his or her own property. The separate property regime at times resulted in unjust marital property distributions at dissolution of the marriage, especially involving cases of the traditional families where most properties were titled in the wage-earning husbands. The flaw of the separate property system is not only that it will occasionally ignore the financial contributions of non-title holding spouse, but also that is unable to take account of a spouse's non-financial contributions. So Korean court adopted the deferred community system by the judicial decisions, using the typical definitions of community property system. It may exemplify the judicial activism. But it need not to distinguish the marital property and non marital property to divide the marital properties. Korean court has discretion on a case-by-case basis to determine the methods and amounts of marital property division to achieve justice, equity and peace of family. Korean law adopted the rule of reasonableness in marital property division. Many modern property rights, especially human capital does not have the attributes traditionally associated with property. In the context of the marital property division, we should respect the reasonable expectations of spouses by accepting the present interests of pensions and employee benefits, stock option, degrees, and goodwill. It may need the amendments of the concerned acts.
참고문헌 (27)
- 김상용, "부부재산제 개정을 위한 하나의 대안, 가족법 연구 Ⅱ" (2006), 법문사
- 김숙자, "부부재산관계법제의 재검토", 명지법학, (5) (2006)
- 김승정, "재산분할의 대상이 되는 재산의 확정 -새로운 재산적 가치들을 중심으로" (2005), 재판실무연구
- 김주수, "친족상속법" (2008), 법문사
- 김준모, "재산분할제도의 성격실무상 문제점을 중심으로, 가정법원사건의 제문제(상)", 재판자료, 101 (2003)
- 민유숙, "가사비송사건으로서의 재산분할, 가정법원사건의 제문제(상)", 재판자료, 101 (2003)
- 민유숙, "외국의 부부재산제도와 재산분할제도 및 부양제도:미국법을 중심으로", 사법논집, 31 (2000)
- 민유숙, "부부재산제도와 재산분할제도의 관계", 사법논집, 26 (1995)
- 민유숙, "재산분할 대상이 되는 재산의 확정에 관한 몇 가지 문제점", 법조, 50(3) (2001)
- 민유숙, "재산분할청구권이 포함된 민사사건의 처리", 민사재판의 제문제, 13 (2004)
- 민유숙, "재산분할에 있어서 분할비율산정 -비교법적 고찰", 저스티스, 34(2) (2001)
- 박동섭, "친족상속법" (2009), 박영사
- 박홍래, "우리나라와 미국의 부부재산제도에 관한 비교 연구", 인권과 정의, (355), pp.160~178 (2006), 대한변호사협회
- 법원행정처, "개정증보 법원실무제요(가사)", ~ (1994)
- 윤진수, "民法改正案 중 夫婦財産制에 관한 연구", 가족법연구, 21(1), pp.107~132 (2007), 한국가족법학회
- 이진기, "부부재산분할청구권의 보전을 위한 취소권제도 비판", 인권과 정의, (392), pp.37~54 (2009), 대한변호사협회
- 이화숙, "부부의 재산관계에 관한 비교법적 연구", ~ (1988)
- 이화숙, "부부재산제와 혼인해소시의 경제적 효과", 가족법연구, (5) (1991)
- 이화숙, "夫婦財産制의 理想에 비추어 본 立法論과 改正案", 인권과 정의, (381), pp.65~85 (2008), 대한변호사협회
- 조미경, "독일 이혼법에 있어서의 연금청산(Versorgungsausgleich)제도", 가족법연구, (6) (1992)
- 조은희, "유럽부부재산제의 입법례가 우리에게 주는 시사점", 비교사법, 12(2), pp.35~69 (2005), 한국비교사법학회
- 內田 貴, "民法Ⅳ" (2007), 東京大學出版會
- D. Kelly Weisberg, "Modern family law, 3rd ed" (2006), Aspen
- William A. Reppy, Jr., "The Uniform Marital Property Act: Some Suggested Revisions for a Basically Sound Act", 21 Hous. L. Rev, pp.679~ (1984)
- Brenda Hale, "The Family, Law & Society: Cases &Materials, 6th ed" (2009), Oxford University Press
- Nigel Lowe, "Bromley's Family Law, 10th ed" (2007), Oxford University Press
- Masha Antokolskaia, "Family law and national culture-Arguing against the cultural constraints argument", Utrecht Law Review, 4(2) (2008)
