본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

소유권이전등기청구권에 대한 가압류와 가처분의 경합

Competition of Provisional Attachment and Injunction about the right to registration of ownership transfer

0

조회

0

다운로드

0

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

초록

This paper examines what discussed and suggested concerning the competition of provisional attachment and injunction about the right to registration of ownership transfer. Precedents adopted theory by according to priority of execution in the competition of provisional attachment and injunction about real estate. But, Precedents adopted theory of provisional attachment priority in the competition of provisional attachment and injunction about the right to registration of ownership transfer. These attitudes of precedents are not convincing. Scholars and Judges are much discussed that the problems of competition to provisional attachment and injunction about the right to registration of ownership transfer. The first opinion is theory of provisional attachment priority. This theory claims that Civil Execution Act was given a stand alone collection right to provisional attachment. But, Injunction was not given a stand alone collection right, only has legal position of general creditor. Therefore, Injunction creditors are only protected by Obligee's Right of Subrogation to the Obligor as general creditors. The second opinion is theory of execution priority. This theory claims that Civil Law and Civil Execution Act allow not method of public announcement about the right to registration of ownership transfer. In the end, Courts have to decide the ranking of provisional attachment and injunction through Civil Law §450. I insists theory of execution priority. The reasons, Injunction creditors keeps ahead of provisional attachment creditors in the real estate contract.

Abstract

This paper examines what discussed and suggested concerning the competition of provisional attachment and injunction about the right to registration of ownership transfer. Precedents adopted theory by according to priority of execution in the competition of provisional attachment and injunction about real estate. But, Precedents adopted theory of provisional attachment priority in the competition of provisional attachment and injunction about the right to registration of ownership transfer. These attitudes of precedents are not convincing. Scholars and Judges are much discussed that the problems of competition to provisional attachment and injunction about the right to registration of ownership transfer. The first opinion is theory of provisional attachment priority. This theory claims that Civil Execution Act was given a stand alone collection right to provisional attachment. But, Injunction was not given a stand alone collection right, only has legal position of general creditor. Therefore, Injunction creditors are only protected by Obligee's Right of Subrogation to the Obligor as general creditors. The second opinion is theory of execution priority. This theory claims that Civil Law and Civil Execution Act allow not method of public announcement about the right to registration of ownership transfer. In the end, Courts have to decide the ranking of provisional attachment and injunction through Civil Law §450. I insists theory of execution priority. The reasons, Injunction creditors keeps ahead of provisional attachment creditors in the real estate contract.

참고문헌 (19)

  1. 강대성, "민사집행법(제4판)" (2008), 삼영사
  2. 곽윤직, "채권총론, 신정(수정판)" (1999), 박영사
  3. 김상원, "주석 민사집행법(Ⅳ)" (2004), 한국사법행정학회
  4. 송덕수, "신민법강의" (2012), 박영사
  5. 이시윤, "신민사집행법, 제5판" (2009), 박영사
  6. 이은영, "채권총론, 개정판" (1999), 박영사
  7. 지원림, "민법강의" (2011), 홍문사
  8. 김문석, "소유권이전등기청구권에 대한 가압류와 가처분의 경합", 대법원판례해설, 통권 : 30 (1998), 법원행정처
  9. 김영진, "보전처분의 경합", 사법논집, 9 (1978), 법원행정처
  10. 김영진, "보전처분의 경합, In 취봉 김용철선생 고희기념논문집" (1993), 박영사
  11. 김유진, "소유권이전등기청구권의 양도성, 그에 관한 보전처분의 경합문제, In 재판실무연구 2002" (2003)
  12. 박덕희, "부동산소유권이전등기청구권 처분금지가처분의 효력", 민사법연구, 14(2) (2006), 대한민사법학회
  13. 박이규, "부동산소유권이전등기청구권 처분금지가처분의 효력, In 민사판례연구(ⅩⅩⅡ)" (2005), 민사판례연구회
  14. 양경승, "보전명령의 집행과 제3자에 대한 효력", 사법논집, 27 (1996), 법원행정처
  15. 윤경, "소유권이전등기청구권에 대한 가처분과 가압류의 우열관계", 사법연수원 논문집, 3 (2002)
  16. 윤경, "보전처분(가압류․가처분)의 실무(상)" (1999), 법률정보센타
  17. 이수철, "소유권이전등기청구권에 대한 처분금지가처분의 효력", 판례연구, 14 (2003), 부산판례연구회
  18. 한기춘, "채권자가 채무자의 제3채무자에 대한 부동산소유권이전등기청구권을 가압류하여 둔 경우 채무자는 제3채무자를 상대로 소유권이전등기소송을 제기할 수 있는가?", 판례연구, 4 (1994), 부산판례연구회
  19. 황용경, "소유권이전등기청구권에 대한 가압류와 가처분의 관계", 재판실무, 1 (1999), 창원지방법원

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (5건)