상속분 조정 제도의 본질과 몇 가지 쟁점
A Few Issues regarding the Inheritance Share Adjustment System
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
With the acceleration of social aging, the weakening of family relationships and the concept of family property, and the strengthening of the concept of personal property, the need for the inheritee to procure support and nursing care for himself and his spouse during the lifetime with his property has increased, and the inheritee’s desire for efficient succession of his property has also grown. On the other hand, the family solidarity, which is the basis for the legal reserve of inheritance, is weakening, and there is a growing need for contribution compensation regardless of the status of heirs. The social necessity to more actively reflect the intent of the inheritee is increasing. However, according to Korean Civil Act, it is impossible to abolish the heir or designate the shares of inheritance according to the will, and it is not clear whether the adjustment of special beneficiary can be exempted. The freedom of the will is largely suppressed. The Supreme Court of Korea, in its 2010da66644 judgment sentenced on December 8, 2011, stipulated that ‘the ratio of the portion given by the inheritee as an advance payment of the inheritance should be evaluated and judged’, in substance, drew a flexible conclusion similar to recognizing the exemption from the adjustment of special beneficiary. In principle, the portion excluded from the special benefit is not added to the basic property for calculating the legal reserve of inheritance, and it should be considered that the legal reserve of inheritance is calculated accordingly. By actively recognizing the exemption from adjustment of special benefit, it is desirable to make flexible and reasonable adjustments to the inheritance share in a way that alleviates the rigidity of the current rules regarding the contributory portion and the legal reserve of inheritance, thereby sufficiently secures the realization scope of the inheritee’s intent.
Abstract
With the acceleration of social aging, the weakening of family relationships and the concept of family property, and the strengthening of the concept of personal property, the need for the inheritee to procure support and nursing care for himself and his spouse during the lifetime with his property has increased, and the inheritee’s desire for efficient succession of his property has also grown. On the other hand, the family solidarity, which is the basis for the legal reserve of inheritance, is weakening, and there is a growing need for contribution compensation regardless of the status of heirs. The social necessity to more actively reflect the intent of the inheritee is increasing. However, according to Korean Civil Act, it is impossible to abolish the heir or designate the shares of inheritance according to the will, and it is not clear whether the adjustment of special beneficiary can be exempted. The freedom of the will is largely suppressed. The Supreme Court of Korea, in its 2010da66644 judgment sentenced on December 8, 2011, stipulated that ‘the ratio of the portion given by the inheritee as an advance payment of the inheritance should be evaluated and judged’, in substance, drew a flexible conclusion similar to recognizing the exemption from the adjustment of special beneficiary. In principle, the portion excluded from the special benefit is not added to the basic property for calculating the legal reserve of inheritance, and it should be considered that the legal reserve of inheritance is calculated accordingly. By actively recognizing the exemption from adjustment of special benefit, it is desirable to make flexible and reasonable adjustments to the inheritance share in a way that alleviates the rigidity of the current rules regarding the contributory portion and the legal reserve of inheritance, thereby sufficiently secures the realization scope of the inheritee’s intent.
참고문헌 (26)
- 김상용, "신탁법 해설" (2012), 법무부
- 김주수, "주석민법 상속(1)" (2015), 한국사법행정학회
- 윤진수, "친족상속법 강의" (2018), 박영사
- 윤진수, "친족상속법 강의" (2020), 박영사
- 지원림, "민법강의" (2018), 홍문사
- 민유숙, "주석 민법 상속" (2020), 한국사법행정학회
- 大村敦志, "新基本民法8 相続編" (2017), 有斐閣
- 潮見佳男, "詳解 相続法" (2019), 弘文堂
- 谷口知平, "新版 注釈民法(27) 相続(2)" (2013), 有斐閣
- 道垣内弘人, "信託法" (2017), 有斐閣
- 中川善之助, "注釈民法(26) 相続(3)" (2013), 有斐閣
- Knut Werner Lange, "Erbrecht, 2. Auflage" (2017), C.H.Beck
- 김상훈, "유언대용신탁을 활용한 가업승계", 기업법연구, 29(4), pp.9~34 (2015), 한국기업법학회
- 변동열, "유류분 제도", 민사판례연구, 25 (2003), 한국민사판례연구회
- 윤진수, "유류분반환청구권의 성질과양수인에 대한 유류분반환청구 - 대법원 2015. 11. 12. 선고 2010다104768 판결 -", 법학논총, 36(2), pp.119~148 (2016), 법학연구소
- 이동진, "유류분법의 개정방향", 가족법연구, 33(1), pp.155~208 (2019), 한국가족법학회[DOI]
- 이봉민, "기여분과 유류분의 관계에 대한 새로운 해석론 ―유류분 부족액 산정방법을 중심으로―", 가족법연구, 32(1), pp.69~106 (2018), 한국가족법학회[DOI]
- 이은정, "특별수익의 반환기준에 관한 재검토", 가족법연구, (10) (1996), 한국가족법학회
- 전경근, "유류분제도의 현황과 개선방안 ―유류분의 산정을 중심으로―", 가족법연구, 32(2), pp.343~378 (2018), 한국가족법학회[DOI]
- 정구태, "한국 유류분제도의 법적 계보―로마법상 유류분제도와 게르만법상 유류분제도에 대한 법사학적 고찰", 민사법연구, 20 (2012), 대한민사법학회
- 최수정, "개정신탁법상의 재산승계제도 -유언대용신탁과 수익자연속신탁을 중심으로-", 법학논총, 31(2), pp.65~87 (2011), 법학연구소
- 최준규, "독일의 유류분 제도", 가족법연구, 22(1), pp.257~302 (2008), 한국가족법학회
- 최준규, "유류분과 기여분의 관계", 저스티스, 162, pp.106~153 (2017), 한국법학원
- 현소혜, "유류분 제도의 개선방안: 영미법으로부터의 시사점", 법률신문, ~ (2019)
- "民法(相続関係) 部会 第26回 会議{平成30年(2018년) 1月 16日} 部会資料 26-2"[URL]
- "民法及び家事事件手続法の一部を改正する法律について(相続法の改正)"[URL]
