과거 양육비 청구의 성질과 소멸시효에 관한 소고 ―대상결정: 대법원 2024. 7. 18 자 2018스724 전원합의체 결정―
The Legal Nature and Statute of Limitations regarding Claims for Past Child Support ― Subject case: Supreme Court Decision 2018Su724 Decided July 18, 2024 ―
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Supreme Court has repeatedly addressed significant issues surrounding claims for retroactive child support, where one parent seeks to recover the costs of raising a child from the other parent for a period before any formal request for child support was made. The decision under review introduces a new principle, particularly with respect to the statute of limitations, distinguishing between the cases where the child is a minor and the cases where the child has reached adulthood. While this new principle respects the existing legal doctrine shaped by previous Supreme Court rulings, it aims to resolve practical injustices that arise from allowing unlimited retroactive claims without time constraints. Although this approach appears to seek a compromise by addressing these issues without fundamentally disrupting the established legal framework, it may seem somewhat contrived in its reasoning. Traditional legal dogmas surrounding parental obligations to care for children or familial duties of support, which have been the basis of past case law, seem to limit a full understanding of the issue. However, claims for past child support should be regarded as a financial right with a compensatory nature, and this perspective should also apply to claims for past support between family members. While the decision attempts to balance the child's welfare with the interests of the other party, it may ultimately fail to fully satisfy either concern. The opposing party, who may be suddenly faced with a large retroactive claim, should be protected through the application of a statute of limitations, which aligns with the purpose of the legal system. The welfare of the child, on the other hand, should be secured not by extending or limiting the statute of limitations, but by implementing institutional mechanisms that ensure timely child support when needed.
Abstract
The Supreme Court has repeatedly addressed significant issues surrounding claims for retroactive child support, where one parent seeks to recover the costs of raising a child from the other parent for a period before any formal request for child support was made. The decision under review introduces a new principle, particularly with respect to the statute of limitations, distinguishing between the cases where the child is a minor and the cases where the child has reached adulthood. While this new principle respects the existing legal doctrine shaped by previous Supreme Court rulings, it aims to resolve practical injustices that arise from allowing unlimited retroactive claims without time constraints. Although this approach appears to seek a compromise by addressing these issues without fundamentally disrupting the established legal framework, it may seem somewhat contrived in its reasoning. Traditional legal dogmas surrounding parental obligations to care for children or familial duties of support, which have been the basis of past case law, seem to limit a full understanding of the issue. However, claims for past child support should be regarded as a financial right with a compensatory nature, and this perspective should also apply to claims for past support between family members. While the decision attempts to balance the child's welfare with the interests of the other party, it may ultimately fail to fully satisfy either concern. The opposing party, who may be suddenly faced with a large retroactive claim, should be protected through the application of a statute of limitations, which aligns with the purpose of the legal system. The welfare of the child, on the other hand, should be secured not by extending or limiting the statute of limitations, but by implementing institutional mechanisms that ensure timely child support when needed.
참고문헌 (23)
- 김윤직, "민법총칙(민법강의 I)" (2013), 박영사
- 송덕수, "친족상속법" (2022), 박영사
- 양창수, "민법 III 권리의 보전과 담보" (2023), 박영사
- 윤진수, "친족상속법강의" (2022), 박영사
- 조은희, "친족상속법" (2023), 정독
- 민유숙, "주석민법" (2020), 한국사법행정학회
- 윤진수, "주해친족법 제2권" (2015), 박영사
- 강현중, "미성년 자녀의 양육과 부양", 사법논집, 12 (1981)
- 김시철, "부부간 과거의 부양관계에 관하여", 사법, (5) (2008)
- 김형석, "양육비청구권을 자동채권으로 하는 상계", 가족법연구, 21(3) (2007)
- 김형석, "제3자의 변제구상부당이득", 법학, 46(1) (2005), 서울대
- 박병호, "과거의 양육비 구상", 법학, 35(3-4) (1994), 서울대학교
- 엄경천, "부양법, 가족법상 독자성을 찾아서", 가족법연구, 29(3) (2015)
- 오종근, "부부간 부양청구권과 양육비청구권 ― 대법원 2017. 8. 25. 자 2014스26 결정을 중심으로―", 이대 법학논집, 23(2) (2018)
- 오진숙, "인지판결 확정 전 양육비 청구", 가족법연구, 38(2) (2024)
- 윤진수, "과거 양육비청구권의 소멸시효", 민사법학, (108) (2024)
- 이동진, "부모 일방의 타방에 대한 과거 양육비 상환청구와 소멸시효 ― 대법원 2011. 7. 29. 자 2008스67결정(공2011하, 1635)―", 가족법연구, 26(2) (2012)
- 이연주, "부부 간의 과거 부양료 및 양육비청구에 관하여", 인권과 정의, (401) (2010)
- 이재찬, "부양의무의 순위 및 그에 기초한 구상관계에 관한 연구", 민사판례연구, 38 (2016)
- 임종효, "양육비청구권에 관한 기초 이론 및 실무상 쟁점", 사법논집, 51 (2010)
- 최준규, "다수당사자 사이의 부양관계에 관한 고찰 ―부양청구권의 성질에 관한 검토를 겸하여―", 가족법연구, 26(3) (2012)
- Malaurie et Fulchiron, "La famille" (2009), Répertoire Defrénois
- MüKoBGB, "Langeheine" (2024)
