채권자대위소송에 있어서 당사자적격의 흠결과 중복소송의 경합에 관한 소고
Study on the competition of duplicate lawsuit and deficiency of standing in subrogation action by an obligee
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Subrogation action by an obligee is a lawsuit where a person, holding the subrogation right of the obligee under civil law, files a lawsuit by right of subrogation. According to civil law, subrogation action by an obligee recognizes the obligee to hold the right of performing the litigation of existence and nonexistence on behalf of the original right holder, the obligor; thus it is acknowledged that the obligee is holds a statutory standing in such case. As far as the legal nature of subrogation action by an obligee is understood as the litigant with statutory standing, it is appropriate to consider that the existence of claim to preservation is related to the existence of standing and is applicable to the requirements for litigation. Therefore, in case an obligee without claim to preservation files a subrogation action, the action is considered unlawful as it does not hold a standing. When a subrogation action (competition of subrogation action) filed independently by multiple obligees or pendency of a lawsuit filed by an obligee or an obligor,in case an obligor or an obligee files a lawsuit later, the later and previous lawsuits become duplicate lawsuits because the litigants or subject matters of each action are the same. During the pendency of a subrogation action by an obligee filed without claim to preservation, a defect occurs between standing (previous lawsuit) and duplicate (later lawsuit) lawsuits and the two compete as another obligee with claim to preservation each files a lawsuit later against the same obligor.As a solution to resolve the competition of defect between standing and duplicate lawsuits due to a lack of claim to preservation, in principle, the principle of investigation order for litigation requirements must be applied. However, in cases where the practical resolving of the conflict or the protection of practical obligee is violated, the application of such principle must be limited; in such case, this study suggests a solution that can resolve the conflict and protect the obligee.
Abstract
Subrogation action by an obligee is a lawsuit where a person, holding the subrogation right of the obligee under civil law, files a lawsuit by right of subrogation. According to civil law, subrogation action by an obligee recognizes the obligee to hold the right of performing the litigation of existence and nonexistence on behalf of the original right holder, the obligor; thus it is acknowledged that the obligee is holds a statutory standing in such case. As far as the legal nature of subrogation action by an obligee is understood as the litigant with statutory standing, it is appropriate to consider that the existence of claim to preservation is related to the existence of standing and is applicable to the requirements for litigation. Therefore, in case an obligee without claim to preservation files a subrogation action, the action is considered unlawful as it does not hold a standing. When a subrogation action (competition of subrogation action) filed independently by multiple obligees or pendency of a lawsuit filed by an obligee or an obligor,in case an obligor or an obligee files a lawsuit later, the later and previous lawsuits become duplicate lawsuits because the litigants or subject matters of each action are the same. During the pendency of a subrogation action by an obligee filed without claim to preservation, a defect occurs between standing (previous lawsuit) and duplicate (later lawsuit) lawsuits and the two compete as another obligee with claim to preservation each files a lawsuit later against the same obligor.As a solution to resolve the competition of defect between standing and duplicate lawsuits due to a lack of claim to preservation, in principle, the principle of investigation order for litigation requirements must be applied. However, in cases where the practical resolving of the conflict or the protection of practical obligee is violated, the application of such principle must be limited; in such case, this study suggests a solution that can resolve the conflict and protect the obligee.
참고문헌 (19)
- 강현중, "민사소송법" (2003), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "채권총론" (1994), 박영사
- 김학기, "민사소송법" (2012), 도서출판 어화
- 김홍엽, "민사소송법" (2011), 박영사
- 김홍규, "민사소송법" (2010), 삼영사
- 박익환, "민사소송법" (2008), 박영사
- 이상경, "주석민법 채권총칙(1)" (2000), 한국사법행정학회
- 이시윤, "신민사소송법" (2011), 박영사
- 이호원, "주석민사소송법(4)" (2004), 한국사법행정학회
- 전병서, "기본강의 민사소송법" (2010), 홍문사
- 유병현, "민사소송법 제3판 보정판" (2010), 법문사
- 지원림, "민법강의" (2012), 홍문사
- 호문혁, "민사소송법" (2006), 법문사
- 박병준, "채권자대위소송과 법정소송담당", 경성법학, 10 (2001), 경성대학교 법학연구소
- 범경철, "채권자대위소송의 실질적 보장과 중복소송", 경희법학, 45(4), pp.95~124 (2010), 법학연구소
- 오창수, "債權者代位訴訟의 실천적 의미 - 당사자의 지위 및 소송요건을 중심으로 -", 법과정책, 16(1), pp.125~167 (2010), 법과정책연구원
- 이동률, "채권자대위소송과 피보전채권", 중앙법학, 13(3), pp.181~202 (2011), 중앙법학회
- 표호건, "당사자적격에 관한 고찰", 원광법학, 23(3), pp.9~34 (2007), 법학연구소
- 호문혁, "채권자대위소송과 중복제소", 법학, 35(1) (1994), 서울대학교 법학연구소
