민법 제535조의 제한해석에 관한 검토
A Review on the Limited Interpretation of Article 535 of Korean Civil Code
0
조회
0
다운로드
1
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Recently arose some issue in Article 535 of Korean Civil Code(KCC) with regard to amendment of KCC. This Section rules the contract invalid, when the performance of contract was initially impossible. But some scholar has a opinion that this section must be restrict applies to the objective impossibility. The opinion that KCC Section 535 must be applied only to the objective impossibility, is convincing with regard to equivalent treatment of the initial impossibility and subsequent impossibility makes some problems. Because some impediments that cause subsequent impossibility should not be subsumed by initial impossibility. But the distinction of subjective impossibility and objective impossibility dose not bring right or light resolution. First the distinction of subjective impossibility and objective impossibility is very difficult in some cases. Second the concept of subjective impossibility is too vague, to bring effective or right resolution. And some cases that must be included in subjective impossibility are regulated by avoid rule. The matter is rather confirmation of impossibility than objective or subjective impossibility.
Abstract
Recently arose some issue in Article 535 of Korean Civil Code(KCC) with regard to amendment of KCC. This Section rules the contract invalid, when the performance of contract was initially impossible. But some scholar has a opinion that this section must be restrict applies to the objective impossibility. The opinion that KCC Section 535 must be applied only to the objective impossibility, is convincing with regard to equivalent treatment of the initial impossibility and subsequent impossibility makes some problems. Because some impediments that cause subsequent impossibility should not be subsumed by initial impossibility. But the distinction of subjective impossibility and objective impossibility dose not bring right or light resolution. First the distinction of subjective impossibility and objective impossibility is very difficult in some cases. Second the concept of subjective impossibility is too vague, to bring effective or right resolution. And some cases that must be included in subjective impossibility are regulated by avoid rule. The matter is rather confirmation of impossibility than objective or subjective impossibility.
참고문헌 (55)
- 양창수, "제390조, In 제390조" (1995), 박영사
- 최흥섭, "민법주해, In 제535조" (1997), 박영사
- 전하은, "주석민법, In 제535조: 박준서(편집대표), 제3판" (2000), 한국사법행정학회
- 곽윤직, "채권총론 신정판" (1994), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "채권총론, 제6판" (2003), 박영사
- 김기선, "한국채권법총론, 제3전정판" (1987), 법문사
- 김동훈, "원시적 불능으로 인한 손해배상의 범위 - 대상판결 : 2011. 7. 28. 선고 2010다1203,1210 판결 -", 법학논총, 24(3), pp.279~308 (2012), 법학연구소
- 김상용, "채권총론, 개정증보판" (2003), 법문사
- 김상용, "채권각론" (2003), 법문사
- 김영두, "원시적 불능에 관한 민법 제535조의 개정에 관한 연구", 재산법연구, 27(1), pp.241~284 (2010), 한국재산법학회
- 김증한, "민법총칙, 제9판" (1995), 박영사
- 김증한, "채권각론" (2007), 박영사
- 김형배, "채권총론, 제2판" (1998), 박영사
- 박영목, "이행불능에 관한 연구", 박사, 법학, pp.2008
- 박영목, "계약체결시의 목적물 부존재와 계약위반 - McRae v. Commonwealth Disposals Commission 사건의 분석 -", 고려법학, (66), pp.339~379 (2012), 법학연구원
- 법무부 민법개정자료발간팀, "2004년 법무부 민법개정안 채권편 ․ 부록" (2013), 법무부
- 법무부 민법개정자료발간팀, "2013년 법무부 민법개정시안 채권편 상" (2013), 법무부
- 이영준, "민법총칙, 개정증보판" (2007), 박영사
- 이은영, "채권각론, 제5판" (2005), 박영사
- 최광준, "독일채권법개정안과 우리 채권법의 기본구조에 관한 소고", 경희법학, 34(1), pp.313~ (1999)
- 최흥섭, "원시적 불능론과 민법 제535조", 재산법연구, 9(1), pp.99~ (1992)
- 최흥섭, "우리 법에서 「계약체결상의 과실」책임의 문제점과 재구성", 민사법학, (11), pp.251~
- 현승종, "로마법" (1996), 법문사
- Arp, Torsten, "Anfangliche Unmoglichkeit" (1988)
- Bucher, Eugen, "Schweizerisches Obligationenrecht Allgemeiner Teil ohne Deliktsrecht" (1988)
- Canaris, Claus-Wilhelm, "Grundlagen und Rechtsfolgen der Haftung f ur anf¨angliche Unmoglichkeit nach" (2005), Andreas Heldrich
- Canaris, Claus-Wilhelm, "Die Reform des Rechts der Leistungsst¨orungen", pp.499~ (2001)
- Cekovic-Vuletic, "Simonida, Haftung wegen Unm¨oglichkeit nach dem Schuldrechtsmodernisierungsgesetz: Haftungsregime" (2003), Haftungsfolgen
- Eichenhofer, Eberhard, "Haftung des Schuldners f¨ur anfangliches Unvermogen", pp.777~ (1989)
- Emmerich, Volker, "Das Recht der Leistungsstorungen" (1997)
- Emmert, Jochen, "Auf der Suche nach den Grenzen vertraglicher Leistungspflichten: die Rechtsprechung des Reichsgerichts 1914-1923" (2001)
- Esser, Josef, "Schuldrecht Bd. I Allgemeiner Teil Teilband" (2000)
- Fikentscher, Wolfgang, "Schuldrecht" (1997)
- Huber, Ulrich, "Leistungsstorungen Bd. I, Bd. II" (1999)
- Huber, Ulrich, "Allgemeine Haftungsprinzipien des Rechts der Leistungsst rungen in der h¨ochstrichterlichen Rechtsprechung, 50 Jahre Bundesgerichtshof: Festgabe aus der Wissenschaft Bd. I B¨urgerliches Recht", pp.251~ (2000)
- Jakobs, Horst Heinrich, "Unmoglichkeit und Nichterfullung" (1969)
- Jakobs, Horst Heinrich, "Die Beratung des B¨urgerlichen Gesetzbuchs in systematischer Zusammenstellung der unver¨offentlichten Quellen" (1978)
- Klausch, Sebastian, "Unmoglichkeit und Unzumutbarkeit im System des allgemeinen Leistungsstorungsrechts nach der schuldrechtsmodernisrung" (2002)
- Kley, Britta, "Unm¨oglichkeit und Pflichtverletzung: Die Funktion der Unm¨oglichkeitstatbest¨ande im BGB und der Reformversuch der Schuldrechtskommission" (2001)
- Koller, Ingo, "Die Risikozurechnung bei Vertragsst¨orungen in Austauschvertr gen" (1979)
- Larenz, Karl, "Lehrbuch des Schuldrechts Bd" (1987)
- Lemppenau, Joachim, "Gattungsschuld und Beschaffungspflicht" (1972)
- Mommsen, Friedrich, "Beitr¨age zum Obligationenrecht, 1, In Unm¨oglichkeit der Leistung in ihrem Einfluß auf obligatorische Verh¨altnisse" (1853)
- Mugdan, Benno, "Die Gesamten Materialien zum B rgerlichen Gesetzbuch f r das Deutsche Reich Bd. II, Recht der Schuldverh ltnisse" (1979)
- "Mnchener Kommentar zum Brgerlichen Gesetzbuch" (2012)
- Patterson, Edwin W, "The Apportionment of Business Risks Through Legal Devices", Columbia Law Review, 24, pp.335~359 (1924)
- Rabel, Ernst, "Unmoglichkeit der Leistung und heutige Praxis, Ernst Rabel Gesammelte Aufsatze Bd. I, 1965, S. 56 ff", pp.467~ (1911)
- RGRK, "Richter des Bundesgerichtshofes (Hrsg.), Das B¨urgerliche Gesetzbuch mit besonderer Ber¨ucksichtigung der Rechtsprechung des Reichsgerichts und des Bundesgerichtshofes", pp.241~413 (1976)
- Savigny, "Friedrich Carl von, Das Obligationenrecht als Theil des heutigen R mischen Rechts Bd. I" (1851)
- Staudinger, "Julius von, Kommentar zum B rgerlichen Gesetzbuch mit Einf¨uhrungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen" (2004), Neubearbeitung
- Treitel, Guenter, H, "Unm¨oglichkeit, Impracticability und Frustration im anglo-amerikanischen Recht" (1991)
- Treitel, Guenter, H, "Frustration and Force Majeure, 2nd Ed" (2004)
- Wagner, Gerhard, "Anspr che auf Unm¨ogliches", pp.482~ (1998)
- Wilhelm, Jan, "achtragliche Unmoglichkeit und nachtraglichen Unverm ogen", pp.223~ (2001)
- Windscheid, Bernhard, "Lehrbuch des Pandektenrechts: unter vergleichender Darstellung des deutschen b¨urgerlichen Rechts Bd. II" (1984)