본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

死者의 人格權과 遺體 ․ 遺骸에 대한 권리 -대법원 2008.11.20. 선고 2007다27670 전원합의체 판결을 중심으로-

The Personal Rights of the Deceased and Rights on either Corpse or Ashes

0

조회

0

다운로드

3

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

The personal rights has protective legal interest that rescues either spiritual pains or property losses and damages when personal values such as life, body and honor, etc are damaged: Therefore, in principle, the rights can be owned not by the deceased but by the ones who are alive. However,when personal rights such as honor of the deceased is actually damaged,not only legal procedures but also protective legal interest of survivors might be of problem. Therefore, this paper briefly examined general theory on personal rights but also personal rights of the deceased. In particular, the author investigated admission of personal rights of the deceased at home and aborad that was discussed. Men leave either corpse or ashes at death: Does either corpse or ashes have influence upon personal rights? The author investigated theories and precedent cases on whether either corpse or ashes could be thought to be an object of ownership and to whom rights on corpse and ashes would belong. These days, the Supreme Court's judgment judged some questions on rights of either corpse or ashes gave implications to have room of discussion. So, the author gave some comments.

Abstract

The personal rights has protective legal interest that rescues either spiritual pains or property losses and damages when personal values such as life, body and honor, etc are damaged: Therefore, in principle, the rights can be owned not by the deceased but by the ones who are alive. However,when personal rights such as honor of the deceased is actually damaged,not only legal procedures but also protective legal interest of survivors might be of problem. Therefore, this paper briefly examined general theory on personal rights but also personal rights of the deceased. In particular, the author investigated admission of personal rights of the deceased at home and aborad that was discussed. Men leave either corpse or ashes at death: Does either corpse or ashes have influence upon personal rights? The author investigated theories and precedent cases on whether either corpse or ashes could be thought to be an object of ownership and to whom rights on corpse and ashes would belong. These days, the Supreme Court's judgment judged some questions on rights of either corpse or ashes gave implications to have room of discussion. So, the author gave some comments.

참고문헌 (26)

  1. 곽윤직, "민법총칙(제7판)" (2002), 박영사
  2. 김상용, "민법총칙" (2009), 화산미디어
  3. 김용한, "민법총칙론(재전정판)" (1997), 박영사
  4. 김주수, "민법총칙(제5판)" (2001), 삼영사
  5. 김증한, "민법총칙(제9판)" (2006), 박영사
  6. 방순원, "신민법총칙" (1959), 한일문화사
  7. 백태승, "민법총칙(제2판)" (2006)
  8. 송덕수, "신민법강의" (2008), 박영사
  9. 이영준, "민법총칙(개정증보판)" (2007), 박영사
  10. 이은영, "민법총칙(제3판)" (2004), 박영사
  11. "민법주해 총칙(1)" (1995), 박영사
  12. 한국사법행정학회, "주석 민법 채권각칙(7)" (2004), 한국사법행정학회
  13. 권오승, "명예의 의의와 명예훼손의 모습", 언론중재, 3(3) (1983), 언론중재위원회
  14. 김재형, "모델소설과 인격권", 인권과 정의, (255) (1997), 대한변호사협회
  15. 김재형, "인격권 일반”: 언론 기타 표현행위에 의한 인격적 침해를 중심으로“, 민사판례연구 제21권" (1999), 박영사
  16. 송경근, "제사주재자의 결정방법과 망인 자신의 유체․유골에 관한 처분행위의 효력및 사자의 인격권", 대법원판례해설, (77) (2009)
  17. 송영민, "장기등 이식에 관한 법률」상의 유족의 지위", 의생명과학과 법, 3 (2010), 원광대학교 법학연구소
  18. 장재옥, "사후의 인격과 유족의 인격보호", 법학논문집, 24(1) (2000), 중앙대학교법학연구소
  19. 지홍원, "인격권의 침해", 사법논집, 10 (1979), 법원도서관
  20. 한위수, "명예의 훼손과 민사상의 제문제", 사법논집, 24 (1993), 법원행정처
  21. 함석천, "사망한 자에 대한 인격권”, 언론관계소송 재판실무연구(1) 언론관계소송" (2008), 한국사법행정학회
  22. 齊藤博, "人格權法の硏究" (1979), 一粒社
  23. 五十嵐淸, "人格權論" (1989), 一粒社
  24. 齊藤博, "人格價値の保護と民法" (1986), 一粒社
  25. 宗宮迅次, "名譽權論" (1961), 有斐閣
  26. 竹田稔, "名譽․プライバシ-侵害に關する民事責任の硏究 判例時報제918호, 제1094호, 제1341호" (1983), 酒井書店

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (9건)