판례로 본 민법 제108조 제2항의 제3자 범위
The Scope of the Third Party of Civil Code §108(2) on Precedents
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The thesis brings various cases of third parties interested based on those who made false expression and examines related precedents, leading to conclusion that it is more important to set the legal standards about a third-party limit than how to define the third party making the false expression. I argue that legal changes should be accompanied if appearance formed by false expression is taken as a fact and resulted in any new right or obligation. In addition, I present balancing conflicting interests between those making the false expression and those considering it as a fact and carrying into effect, attributing a fault to those making the false expression after comparing disadvantage those making false statement experience and advantage those carrying into effect based on the belief that the false expression is true.
Abstract
The thesis brings various cases of third parties interested based on those who made false expression and examines related precedents, leading to conclusion that it is more important to set the legal standards about a third-party limit than how to define the third party making the false expression. I argue that legal changes should be accompanied if appearance formed by false expression is taken as a fact and resulted in any new right or obligation. In addition, I present balancing conflicting interests between those making the false expression and those considering it as a fact and carrying into effect, attributing a fault to those making the false expression after comparing disadvantage those making false statement experience and advantage those carrying into effect based on the belief that the false expression is true.
참고문헌 (25)
- 곽윤직, (2013), 박영사
- 곽윤직, (2005), 박영사
- 김대정, "민법총칙" (2012), 도서출판 피데스
- 김증한, "민법총칙" (2001), 박영사
- 이영준, "민법총칙" (2005), 박영사
- 이은영, "민법총칙" (2005), 박영사
- 지원림, "민법강의" (2007), 홍문사
- 곽윤직, (2007), 박영사
- 박준서, "주석민법" (2001), 한국사법행정학회
- 內田貴, "民法Ⅰ" (2008), 東京大學出版會
- 內田貴, "民法Ⅲ" (2009), 東京大學出版會
- 四宮和夫, "民法總則" (2005), 弘文堂
- 平野裕之, "民法總則" (2011), 日本評論社
- 平野裕之, "債權總論" (2005), 信山社
- 川島武宜, "新版注釈民法(3), 總則(3)" (2003), 有閣
- 권영준, "통정허위표시로 인한 법률관계에 있어서 파산관재인의 제3자성", 법조, 56(5)통권 : 608, pp.44~93 (2007), 법조협회
- 김득환, "민법 제108조 제2항 소정의 ‘제3자’에 해당하는지 여부에 대한 판단기준", 대법원판례해설, (35) (2001)
- 양창수, "2003년 民事判例管見", 民法硏究第, 8, pp.361~410 (2005), 博英社
- 윤진수, "借名貸出을 둘러싼 法律問題(하)- 대법원 2005. 5. 12. 선고 2004다68366 판결 -", 법조, 56(1)통권 : 604, pp.209~245 (2007), 법조협회
- 윤진수, "虛僞表示와 第3者", 저스티스, (94), pp.237~268 (2006), 한국법학원
- 이동형, "통정허위표시를 한 자의 파산관재인이 민법 제108조 제2항의 제삼자인지 여부", 법조, 53(6)통권 : 573, pp.123~147 (2004), 법조협회
- 정병호, "부동산의 가압류채권자가 계약의 해제에 있어 보호되는 제3자에 해당하는지 여부", 저스티스, (91), pp.211~226 (2006), 한국법학원
- 제철웅, "불성립한 보증채무를 이행한 보증인의 보호와 민법 제108조 제2항", 민사법학, (21), pp.266~291 (2002), 한국민사법학회
- 조현욱, "通情虛僞表示에 의한 대출약정의 채권자가 파산한 경우 그 破産管財人이 제3자에 해당하는지 여부’", 裁判과 判例, 12 (2004), , 大邱判例硏究會
- 中山布紗, "民法94條2項の第3者-‘法律上の利害關係の再評價-", 九大法學, (91) (2005)