民法 第406條 原狀回復의 方法으로서의 價額賠償에 관한 一考察
A Study on Compensation of Equivalent Value as the Method of Recovery in Article 406 of the Korean Civil Code
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Creditor’s right of revocation is a system that a creditor intervenes legal act of a debtor for the purpose of ensuring his own right effectively and that he would deny debtor’s act of fraudulence and attempt to recover the property of his duty. In my opinion when there is a conflict as to who is worthier to be protected, the beneficiary. or the prior holder of property should be protected more. This is because the creditor has the responsibility for not using the opportunity to protect his right by creating a real right for security by paying a procedure for a preservative measure before debtor’s fraudulent act whereas the beneficiary acquired the ownership or a real right for security by paying consideration through legal act with the debtor in reliance on the public notice. Creditor's right of revocation is a system that revokes undue legal act of debtor and recovers the debtor's property, when the debtor deviated it by unduly disposing of it. Although the system of creditor's right of revocation is very useful to the creditor in that it secures and maintains the property for which the creditor is responsible, on the other hand, it is very disadvantageous for the debtor and the third party that trades with the debtor.
Abstract
Creditor’s right of revocation is a system that a creditor intervenes legal act of a debtor for the purpose of ensuring his own right effectively and that he would deny debtor’s act of fraudulence and attempt to recover the property of his duty. In my opinion when there is a conflict as to who is worthier to be protected, the beneficiary. or the prior holder of property should be protected more. This is because the creditor has the responsibility for not using the opportunity to protect his right by creating a real right for security by paying a procedure for a preservative measure before debtor’s fraudulent act whereas the beneficiary acquired the ownership or a real right for security by paying consideration through legal act with the debtor in reliance on the public notice. Creditor's right of revocation is a system that revokes undue legal act of debtor and recovers the debtor's property, when the debtor deviated it by unduly disposing of it. Although the system of creditor's right of revocation is very useful to the creditor in that it secures and maintains the property for which the creditor is responsible, on the other hand, it is very disadvantageous for the debtor and the third party that trades with the debtor.
참고문헌 (34)
- 곽윤직, "채권총론" (2006), 박영사
- 김상용, "채권총론" (2003), 법문사
- 김주수, "채권총론" (2003), 삼영사
- 김형배, "채권총론", pp.421~ (1999), 박영사
- 이은영, "채권총론", pp.484~ (2006), 박영사
- 소병직, "채권자 취소권에 있어서의 가액배상에 관한 고찰", 법학연구, 25 (2007), 전북대학교 법학연구소
- 이상경, "채권자취소소송에 있어서 원상회복방법 및 채권의 만족방법", 중앙법학, pp.543~544 (1999), 중앙법학회
- 윤경, "사해행위취소와 가액배상", 저스티스, 34(5) (2001), 한국법학원
- 飯原一乘, "詐害行爲取消訴訟", pp.184~ (2006), 悠悠社
- 이은영, "채권자취소권, in 소봉김용한교수화갑기념 민사법학의 제문제", pp.306~ (1990), 기념논문집간행위원회
- 민일영, "독일의 채권자취소제도", 재판자료, 48, pp.5~ (1989), 법원행정처
- 곽윤직, "민법주해Ⅳ 채권(2)" (1995), 박영사
- 양형우, "채무자의 근저당권설정행위와 가압류채권자의 채권자취소권 - 대법원 2008.2.28.선고 2007다77446 판결 -", 홍익법학, 10(2), pp.343~374 (2009), 법학연구소
- 박성철, "사해행위와 가액배상액산정의 기준시", 판례연구, 11 (2000), 부산판례연구회
- 山川一陽, "詐害行爲と價額賠償額算定の基準時", 別冊ヅュリスト, (137), pp.48~ (1996), 民法判例百選Ⅱ
- 최영남, "채권자취소권 행사의 방법, 범위 및 원상회복의 방법", 재판실무연구, pp.303~ (1999), 광주지방법원
- 이영갑, "채권자취소소송에서 반환할 가액배상액의 산정 - 대법원 2001.12.27, 선고, 2001다33734 판결 -", 판례연구, 14 (2003), 부산판례연구회
- 임채웅, "채권자취소권의 행사방법에 관한 연구", 인권과 정의, (292) (2000), 대한변호사협회
- 법무법인 해마루, "사해행위취소소송연구", pp.248~ (2006), 도서출판 솔숲
- 奧田昌道, "注釋民法(10) 債權(1)" (1987), 有斐閣
- 김증한, "주석 채권총칙(상)", pp.405~ (1994), 한국사법행정학회
- 김증한, "주석민법"
- 고경우, "채권자취소권에 있어서의 피보전권리", 판례연구, 9, pp.124~ (1998), 부산판례연구회
- 이수기, "사해행위취소의 범위와 원상회복의 방법", 판례연구, 8, pp.207~ (1998), 부산판례연구회
- 이한석, "사해행위취소소송에 있어서 가액배상의 여러 문제", 부산법조논집, (2) (2007), 부산지방변호사회
- 最高裁, "判決 下森定, “”詐害行爲後の辨濟による目的下不動産上の共同抵當權消滅の場合の取消の範圍·原狀回復の方法·價格賠償の額", ジコリスト, (1024), pp.77~ (1993), 臨時增刊 重要判例解說, 有斐閣
- 이백규, "채권자취소권의 행사요건", 법조, (534), pp.85~86 (2001)
- 김창종, "채권자취소권행사에 의한 원상회복의 방법 및 내용", 사법논집, 26, pp.171~ (1995), 법원행정처
- 한국현, "채권자취소권의 성질과 효과에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2005
- 이시윤, "신민사소송법", pp.277~278 (2006), 박영사
- 이진수, "가액배상을 구하는 사해행위취소소송에서 원물반환을 명할 수 있는지 여부", 판례연구, 21 (2010), 부산판례연구회
- 황남석, "채권자취소송의 가액배상과 관련된 몇 가지 문제점에 관한 소고", 변호사, pp.278~ (2005), 서울지방변호사회
- 김재형, "채권자취소권의 본질과 효과에 관한 연구", 인권과 정의, (329), pp.108~126 (2004), 대한변호사협회