면접교섭권자의 범위확대의 기준과 한계 ―형제자매, 제3자의 면접교섭권을 중심으로 ―
Criteria and limitation on the expansion of visitation rights ― Focus on the visitation rights of sibling and a third party ―
0
조회
0
다운로드
0
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The appearance of the family in modern society has changed due to the increase in divorce and remarriage. Accordingly, the parenting patterns of the children who are members of the family have been diversified. In the end, there has been a steady discussion that the subject of visitation rights under article 837-2 of the civil act, which is recognized only by one parent who does not raise the child after divorce, should be expanded. Accordingly, the scope of visitation rights was expanded by partial revision of the Civil Act on December 2, 2016, and according to Article 837-2(2) of the revised Civil Act, the subjects of Visitation Rights under the Civil Act are children, non-custodial parents, a lineal ascendant of non-custodial parents. However, the question of whether siblings, relatives, step parents, a third party who has no kinship but has actually played a role of a parent except parents and grandparents stipulated in civil law should be granted the right to interview with their children. Article 837-2(2) of the current Civil Act limits the scope of a third party who can request interview negotiations to the a lineal ascendant of one parent and in the case of lineal ascendant, the right of interview and negotiation is recognized only when certain requirements are met. However, compared to foreign legislative cases, the attitude of the Korean Civil Law regarding the subject of this visitation right is a relatively passive position. Under the current civil law, siblings cannot be the subject of the right to interview and negotiation. If the relationship between brothers and sisters is cut off, such as when the relationship between parents and children is cut off, legislative consideration is needed for this, and in this respect, siblings need to be expanded to the subject of interview negotiation. In addition, the right of step-parents to negotiate interviews with their step-children is not recognized in the interpretation of the current law (Article 837-2 (1) and (2)). However, if step parents have formed a social- family-relationship based on affection and trust with their stepchildren for a long time, and acknowledging interview negotiations is in line with the welfare of their children, I think it is desirable to admit interview negotiations to step parents. The foster care parent are also not included in the right to interview negotiations, but it is necessary to recognize the right to interview the child’s foster care parent after the family entrustment is terminated.
Abstract
The appearance of the family in modern society has changed due to the increase in divorce and remarriage. Accordingly, the parenting patterns of the children who are members of the family have been diversified. In the end, there has been a steady discussion that the subject of visitation rights under article 837-2 of the civil act, which is recognized only by one parent who does not raise the child after divorce, should be expanded. Accordingly, the scope of visitation rights was expanded by partial revision of the Civil Act on December 2, 2016, and according to Article 837-2(2) of the revised Civil Act, the subjects of Visitation Rights under the Civil Act are children, non-custodial parents, a lineal ascendant of non-custodial parents. However, the question of whether siblings, relatives, step parents, a third party who has no kinship but has actually played a role of a parent except parents and grandparents stipulated in civil law should be granted the right to interview with their children. Article 837-2(2) of the current Civil Act limits the scope of a third party who can request interview negotiations to the a lineal ascendant of one parent and in the case of lineal ascendant, the right of interview and negotiation is recognized only when certain requirements are met. However, compared to foreign legislative cases, the attitude of the Korean Civil Law regarding the subject of this visitation right is a relatively passive position. Under the current civil law, siblings cannot be the subject of the right to interview and negotiation. If the relationship between brothers and sisters is cut off, such as when the relationship between parents and children is cut off, legislative consideration is needed for this, and in this respect, siblings need to be expanded to the subject of interview negotiation. In addition, the right of step-parents to negotiate interviews with their step-children is not recognized in the interpretation of the current law (Article 837-2 (1) and (2)). However, if step parents have formed a social- family-relationship based on affection and trust with their stepchildren for a long time, and acknowledging interview negotiations is in line with the welfare of their children, I think it is desirable to admit interview negotiations to step parents. The foster care parent are also not included in the right to interview negotiations, but it is necessary to recognize the right to interview the child’s foster care parent after the family entrustment is terminated.
참고문헌 (38)
- 김용한, "신친족상속법론" (2002), 박영사
- 김주수, "주석 친족·상속법" (1993), 법문사
- 김주수, "친족상속법" (2013), 법문사
- 김주수, "주석 민법, 친족(2)" (2010), 한국사법행정학회
- 박동섭, "친족상속법" (2013), 박영사
- 송덕수, "친족상속법" (2017), 박영사
- 신영호, "가족법강의" (2013), 세창출판사
- 양수산, "친족상속법" (1998), 한국외국어대학교 출판부
- 오시영, "친족상속법" (2006), 학현사
- 윤진수, "친족상속법강의" (2016), 박영사
- 이경희, "가족법" (2004), 법원사
- 윤진수, "주해친족법 제1권" (2015), 박영사
- 곽민희, "프랑스법상 조부모의 방문권(droit de visite)", 가족법연구, 27(3), pp.177~208 (2013), 한국가족법학회
- 권용우, "비양육친의 면접교섭권", 법학논총, 34(1), pp.421~446 (2010), 법학연구소[DOI]
- 김민지, "면접교섭권 확대에 관한 민법개정안에 대한 소고", 일감법학, (37), pp.83~123 (2017), 법학연구소[DOI]
- 김민지, "가정위탁제도에 관한 법적 고찰 ―위탁부모의 법적지위를 중심으로―", 가족법연구, 24(2), pp.167~210 (2010), 한국가족법학회
- 김상용, "면접교섭권", 법학연구, 40(1) (1999)
- 김수정, "자녀의 최선의 이익과 면접교섭권", 가족법연구, 19(1), pp.309~347 (2005), 한국가족법학회
- 김연, "면접교섭권에 관한 절차적 문제점과 최근의 동향- 면접교섭권절차에 있어서의 자의 지위 -", 민사소송, 11(2), pp.358~381 (2007), 한국민사소송법학회
- 김은아, "조손간의 면접교섭권", 한양법학, (37), pp.179~194 (2012), 한양법학회
- 김은아, "재혼가족의 친족법적 과제", 가족법연구, 24(3), pp.75~98 (2010), 한국가족법학회
- 박득배, "자(子)의 권리로서 면접교섭권", 가족법연구, 32(1), pp.149~182 (2018), 한국가족법학회[DOI]
- 박복순, "조손가족의 법률문제", 젠더법학, 1(2) (2009)
- 서종희, "면접교섭권자의 범위확대를 위한 해석과 그 한계 ―일본민법과의 비교를 중심으로―", 가족법연구, 34(2), pp.1~46 (2020), 한국가족법학회
- 서종희, "프랑스민법상 방문권 - 방문권자(면접교섭권자)의 범위를 중심으로 -", 국제법무, 12(2), pp.147~187 (2020), 법과정책연구원[DOI]
- 신동현, "조부모의 면접교섭권― 광주고등법원 2015. 1. 7. 자 2013브3 결정 ―", 법학논총, 38(1), pp.397~420 (2018), 법학연구소[DOI]
- 안문희, "프랑스민법상의 면접교섭권", 가족법연구, 33(1), pp.209~232 (2019), 한국가족법학회[DOI]
- 윤부찬, "조부모의 면접교섭권에 관한 연구", 민사법학, (38), pp.499~538 (2007), 한국민사법학회
- 이림, "이혼 부부의 자녀와의 면접교섭권", 가정법원사건의 제문제 (2003)
- 이은정, "아동의 면접교섭권", 사법, 1(35), pp.3~34 (2016), 사법발전재단[DOI]
- 이현재, "의붓부모의 방문권과 당사자 적격 ― 미국을 중심으로", 민사법연구, 12(1) (2004)
- 장창민, "면접교섭권에 관한 일고", 가족법연구, 15(1) (2001)
- 진도왕, "미국의 “사실상 부모(De Facto Parent)”법리에 관한 고찰", 법학논고, (71), pp.273~300 (2020), 법학연구원[DOI]
- 진민희, "조부모의 면접교섭권", 사법, 1(10), pp.131~167 (2009), 사법발전재단[DOI]
- 최민수, "독일법상 조부모 이외의 제3자의 면접교섭권에 관한 법적 고찰 -면접교섭권자의 범위에 관한 독일민법과 비교를 중심으로-", 민사법의 이론과 실무, 22(1), pp.221~275 (2018), 민사법의 이론과 실무학회[DOI]
- 최진섭, "형제자매관계의 민법상 의의", 가족법연구, 22(3), pp.373~398 (2008), 한국가족법학회
- 허남순, "유엔 아동권리협약의 원칙과 국내 가정위탁보호의 현황분석", 한국아동복지학, (22), pp.95~126 (2006), 한국아동복지학회
- 현소혜, "조부모와 계부모 기타 친족의 면접교섭권: 해석론과 입법론", 가족법연구, 29(2), pp.1~34 (2015), 한국가족법학회
