본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

근친상속권 보장에 관한 史的 고찰―로마법상 유산점유제도와 배륜유언의 소를 중심으로―

The Formation of Forced Heirship in Roman Law

0

조회

0

다운로드

6

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

The freedom to make a will was established in Roman law. The core of a testament was heredis institutio which performed an important function to prevent division of family property by appointing one of testator’s children as heir. Generally, the testator gave care to his children who were not designated as heirs by a disposition inter vivos or mortis causa such as dotis datio or legatum etc. As Rome transformed into a commercial society, the abuse of freedom to make a will-which did not care his close relatives (among others liberi), as a result, they suffered unexpected disadvantages-came to the fore as a serious social issue. Roman lawyers and praetor had attempted to solve this problem, also many constitutiones were made during the Roman Empire for this. The rule of praeteritio, bonorum possessio contra tabulas, and querela de inofficioso testamento played an important role to limit the freedom to make a will for the protection of the close relatives of testator. This problem eventually came to an end by the time of Emperor Justinian by the actio ad supplendam legitimam which was the origin form of the forced heirship. The changes of the Roman law of succession vividly illustrates the tension between the freedom to make a will and protection of the close relatives of testator. But one thing has not changed is that the freedom to make a will took priority over the protection of the close relatives at least in classical law. Despite of the fundamental paradigm shift from agnatio to cognatio, the testator was able to dispose of his property at will in effect as long as the testament was written in accordance with the law. The introduction of querela de inofficioso testamento actually forced testator to consider his close relatives in order not to be cancelled his testament for reason of inofficiosum, it meant he violated his duty to care his close relatives. In such a way, however, the close relatives were protected only indirectly. By the time of the Emperor Justinian comprehensive reforms of the law of succession were made. Among them he granted the remedy of actio ad supplendam legitimam to whom received less than his quarta debitae portionis. At the same time, Emperor Justinian explicitly enumerated the reasons for disqualification which justified the exclusion of the inheritance by a testator. These measures can be evaluated as attempts to find a balance between freedom to make a will and the protection of the close relatives.

Abstract

The freedom to make a will was established in Roman law. The core of a testament was heredis institutio which performed an important function to prevent division of family property by appointing one of testator’s children as heir. Generally, the testator gave care to his children who were not designated as heirs by a disposition inter vivos or mortis causa such as dotis datio or legatum etc. As Rome transformed into a commercial society, the abuse of freedom to make a will-which did not care his close relatives (among others liberi), as a result, they suffered unexpected disadvantages-came to the fore as a serious social issue. Roman lawyers and praetor had attempted to solve this problem, also many constitutiones were made during the Roman Empire for this. The rule of praeteritio, bonorum possessio contra tabulas, and querela de inofficioso testamento played an important role to limit the freedom to make a will for the protection of the close relatives of testator. This problem eventually came to an end by the time of Emperor Justinian by the actio ad supplendam legitimam which was the origin form of the forced heirship. The changes of the Roman law of succession vividly illustrates the tension between the freedom to make a will and protection of the close relatives of testator. But one thing has not changed is that the freedom to make a will took priority over the protection of the close relatives at least in classical law. Despite of the fundamental paradigm shift from agnatio to cognatio, the testator was able to dispose of his property at will in effect as long as the testament was written in accordance with the law. The introduction of querela de inofficioso testamento actually forced testator to consider his close relatives in order not to be cancelled his testament for reason of inofficiosum, it meant he violated his duty to care his close relatives. In such a way, however, the close relatives were protected only indirectly. By the time of the Emperor Justinian comprehensive reforms of the law of succession were made. Among them he granted the remedy of actio ad supplendam legitimam to whom received less than his quarta debitae portionis. At the same time, Emperor Justinian explicitly enumerated the reasons for disqualification which justified the exclusion of the inheritance by a testator. These measures can be evaluated as attempts to find a balance between freedom to make a will and the protection of the close relatives.

참고문헌 (32)

  1. von einem Vereine Rechtsgelehrter, "Digesten-Otto=Das Corpus Juris Civilis in’s Deutsche übersetzt", von einem Vereine Rechtsgelehrter und herausgegeben von Carl, ~ (1830)
  2. Digest-Scott, "The Civil Law: The Digest or Pandects (Scott)", ~ (1932)
  3. Digest-Watson, "The Digest of Justinian", ~ (1998)
  4. 곽윤직, (2004), 박영사
  5. 김주수, "주석민법, 상속(2)" (2015)
  6. 김형석, "우리 상속법의 비교법적 위치", 가족법연구, 23(2), pp.75~126 (2009), 한국가족법학회
  7. 송덕수, "친족상속법" (2017), 박영사
  8. 윤진수, "친족상속법강의" (2018), 박영사
  9. 성중모, "유스티니아누스 법학제요 한글초역-제2권 번역과 주석", 법사학연구, 45, pp.127~ (2012)
  10. 정구태, "한국 유류분제도의 법적 계보-로마법상유류분제도와 게르만법상 유류분제도에 대한 법사학적 고찰", 민사법연구, 20, pp.149~ (2012)
  11. 정병호, "로마 고전법상 부권면제자의 재산반입(collotio bonorum)", 한국법사학회 제126회 정례학술발표회(2018.10.12) 발표문 (2018)
  12. 최병조, "로마법강의" (2004), 박영사
  13. 최병조, "로마법상 사용취득(usucapio)의 권원 개념(I) - 表見權原과 誤想權原 -", 서울대학교 법학, 50(2), pp.451~496 (2009), 법학연구소
  14. 최병조, "로마법상 사용취득(usucapio)의 권원 개념(II) - Pro suo와 Pro possessore를 중심으로 -", 서울대학교 법학, 50(3), pp.1~88 (2009), 법학연구소
  15. 최병조, "로마법상의 신분변동 頭格減等(capitis deminutio)에 관한 소고 - D.4.5 De capite minutis 역주를 겸하여 -", 법사학연구, (54), pp.251~296 (2016), 한국법사학회[DOI]
  16. 최병조, "十二表法(對譯)", 로마법연구, I, pp.2~ (1995)
  17. 최병조, "經國大典과 유언의 자유", 서울대학교 법학, 59(2), pp.1~52 (2018), 법학연구소[DOI]
  18. 현소혜, "유언의 해석" (2010), 경인문화사
  19. 현승종, "로마법" (2004), 법문사
  20. 성승현, "Bonorum possessio contra tabulas", 법학연구, (18), pp.571~599 (2005), 한국법학회
  21. Berger, Adolf, "Encyclopedic Dictionary of Roman Law: Transactions of the American Philosophical Society", New Series, 43(2) (1953)
  22. Die Institutionen des Gaius, "herausgegeben, übersetzt und kommentiert von Ulrich Manthe", ~ (2004)
  23. Henning, Michael, "Die lex Falcidia und das Erbrecht des BGB", ~ (1999)
  24. von E. Seckel, "Heumanns Handlexikon zu den Quellen des römischen Rechts" (1926), zweiter unveränderter Neudruck
  25. Honsell, "Römisches Recht" (1987)
  26. Kaser, Max, "Das Römische Privatrecht, erster Abschnitt, Zweite neubearbeitete Auflage" (1975)
  27. Kaser, "Römisches Privatrecht" (2017)
  28. Lenel, Otto, "Das Edictum Perpetuum , 2" (1974)
  29. Schulz, Fritz, "Classical Roman Law", ~ (1954)
  30. Schulz, Fritz, "Principles of Roman Law", ~ (1956)
  31. Zimmermann, Reinhard, "Die Erbfolge gegen das Testament im Römischen Recht:Formelles und materielles Noterbrecht im Spannungsfeld von Testierfreiheit und familiärer Solidarität", Reformfragen des Pflichtteilsrechts:Symposium, pp.99f~ (2007)
  32. Zulueta, Francis de, "The Institute of Gaius: Part I text with critical Notes and Translation", ~ (1951)

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (10건)