본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

선행자백과 등가치진술의 이론

Preceding Confession and Theory of Equivalent Statement

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

Confession (Geständnis) generally means that at a pleading date or a preliminary pleading date, a party make a statement unfavorable to himself which, however, complies with the other party's argument. Confession in itself means to admit such a fact unfavorable to himself as true that the other party insists, and it is a confession at a trial if stated during a pleading date or a preliminary pleading date and it has a special meaning at a civil suit which adopts defense principle for the effect of litigation. In addition, once confession is established, it is unnecessary to prove its validity. Therefore, the one who bears the burden of proof regarding the confession becomes free from such burden and a court has to adopt such a confession as a basis of judgment even if the court has got a belief different from the confession of a party. A confession at a trial is a kind of action and therefore, it has to fulfill effective requirements of litigation to be valid. Accordingly, a party must possess litigation capacity. Establishment of a confession begins with concurrent statements of both parties. Generally speaking, the other party's statement precedes a confession and then confession is established by admitting such statement later. However, a party may make a statement unfavorable to himself in advance and then the other party quotes it afterward for a confession to be established. If a party voluntarily makes a statement unfavorable to himself in advance and then the other party quotes it explicitly or makes a statement complying with said unfavorable fact, this binds a court which becomes obliged not to acknowledge a fact contradictory to said fact. Also, it is necessary for both parties' arguments are consistent each other if a party voluntarily makes a statement unfavorable to himself in advance and then the other party quotes it and therefore, the party who makes an unfavorable statement is entitled to withdraw his own statement and to freely make a statement contradictory to previous one prior to the other party's quotation. This is a problem related to preceding confession. This study looks into a problem related to preceding confession among various kinds of confession (Geständnis). What is preceding confession, This study will examine which binding power preceding confession has on parties and court. In addition, a preceding confession, which means the situation that a party made a statement unfavorable to himself in advance but the other party has not yet quoted it is distinguished from a confession at a trial, and with respect to a preceding confession this study looks into a theory of equivalent statement being argued in Germany and Japan.

Abstract

Confession (Geständnis) generally means that at a pleading date or a preliminary pleading date, a party make a statement unfavorable to himself which, however, complies with the other party's argument. Confession in itself means to admit such a fact unfavorable to himself as true that the other party insists, and it is a confession at a trial if stated during a pleading date or a preliminary pleading date and it has a special meaning at a civil suit which adopts defense principle for the effect of litigation. In addition, once confession is established, it is unnecessary to prove its validity. Therefore, the one who bears the burden of proof regarding the confession becomes free from such burden and a court has to adopt such a confession as a basis of judgment even if the court has got a belief different from the confession of a party. A confession at a trial is a kind of action and therefore, it has to fulfill effective requirements of litigation to be valid. Accordingly, a party must possess litigation capacity. Establishment of a confession begins with concurrent statements of both parties. Generally speaking, the other party's statement precedes a confession and then confession is established by admitting such statement later. However, a party may make a statement unfavorable to himself in advance and then the other party quotes it afterward for a confession to be established. If a party voluntarily makes a statement unfavorable to himself in advance and then the other party quotes it explicitly or makes a statement complying with said unfavorable fact, this binds a court which becomes obliged not to acknowledge a fact contradictory to said fact. Also, it is necessary for both parties' arguments are consistent each other if a party voluntarily makes a statement unfavorable to himself in advance and then the other party quotes it and therefore, the party who makes an unfavorable statement is entitled to withdraw his own statement and to freely make a statement contradictory to previous one prior to the other party's quotation. This is a problem related to preceding confession. This study looks into a problem related to preceding confession among various kinds of confession (Geständnis). What is preceding confession, This study will examine which binding power preceding confession has on parties and court. In addition, a preceding confession, which means the situation that a party made a statement unfavorable to himself in advance but the other party has not yet quoted it is distinguished from a confession at a trial, and with respect to a preceding confession this study looks into a theory of equivalent statement being argued in Germany and Japan.

참고문헌 (32)

  1. 강현중, "民事訴訟法(제6판)" (2004), 박영사
  2. 金祥源, "註釋민사소송법Ⅴ" (2004), 한국사법행정학회
  3. 김홍규, "民事訴訟法" (2008), 삼영사
  4. 송상현, "民事訴訟法" (2008), 博英社
  5. 李時潤, "新民事訴訟法(第2版)" (2010), 博英社
  6. 田炳西, "民事訴訟法講義" (2003), 法文社
  7. 정동윤, "민사소송법" (2010), 법문사
  8. 정영환, "신민사소송법" (2009), 세창출판사
  9. 호문혁, "民事訴訟法" (2006), 法文社
  10. 강현중, "재판상 자백의 대상. in: 考試界(論點 民事訴訟法)" (1985), 考試界社
  11. 유병현, "民事訴訟上 自白", 고려대학교 학술발표 (2005), 홍문사
  12. 兼子一, "新修民事訴訟法體系" (1965), 酒井書店
  13. 木川統一郞, "訴訟促進政策の新發展" (1987), 日本評論社
  14. 三ゲ月章, "民事訴訟法(第三版)" (1992), 弘文堂
  15. 松本博之, "民事自白法」(判例·學說の再檢討)" (1994), 弘文堂
  16. 鈴木正裕, "演習民事訴訟法" (1982), 有斐閣
  17. 鈴木正裕, "辯論主義に關する諸問題(講演)", 司法硏修所論集, 77 (1986)
  18. A. Blomeyer, "Zivilprozeßrecht, Erkenntnisverfahren, 2. Aufl" (1985), Göttingen
  19. Anders, "Das Assessorexamen im Zivilrecht, 3. Aufl" (1991), Düsseldorf
  20. Brauer, "Zur Lehre vom gleichwertigen Parteivorbringen" (1956), JZ
  21. E. Schneider, "Der Zivilrechtsfall in Prüfung und Praxis, 7. Aufl", München, ~ (1988)
  22. H. Musielak, "Zivilprozessrecht, FranzVahlen, 4. Aufl", ~ (2005)
  23. O. Jauerning, "Das gleichwertige Parteivorbringen, Festschrift für Karl HeinzSchwab", München, ~ (1990)
  24. O. Jauerning, "Zivilprozeßrecht, 21, Aufl", München, ~ (1985)
  25. O. Mühl, "Die Lehre von Gutachten und Urteil" (1964), JuS
  26. Schellhammer, "Die Arbeitsmethode des Zivilrichters, 10. Aufl", Heidelberg, ~ (1990)
  27. Sattelmacher, "Gutachten und Urteil, 31, Aufl", München, ~ (1989)
  28. Schmidt, "Gleichwertiges Parteivorbr" (1956), JZ
  29. Stein, "ZPO, 21. Aufl", Tübingen, ~ (1994)
  30. Rosenberg, "Zivilprozessrecht, 14. Aufl", München, ~ (1984)
  31. Rosenberg, "Zivilprozessrecht, 16. Aufl", ~ (2004)
  32. "법률종합정보", 대법원 홈페이지[URL]

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (14건)