상속회복청구권의 성질
A Study on the Legal Nature of the Claim for Recovery of Succession
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
Abstract
This article examines traditional theories about how to understand the legal nature of the claim for recovery of succession and analyses the Korean Supreme Court cases. As a result, this article concludes as follows: First, regarding to the legal nature of the claim for recovery of succession, there have traditionally been ① the theory of confirmation of inheritance eligibility, ② the theory of the claim for property returns, and ③ the theory of compromise. In addition, the theory of confirmation of inheritance eligibility is divided into the theory of confirmation right and the theory of claim for request. Moreover, the theory of the claim for property returns has the theory of independent rights and the theory of collective rights. By the way, the reason why there has been the above dispute is that the Korean Civil Code has the only one article on the claim for recovery of succession. Of course, it could be possible that we construe the claim for recovery of succession as a independent right from other individual rights of claim, but in this case, peaple can exercise individual rights of claim such as claim of real property right even after the exclusion period regarding to the claim for recovery of succession in Article 999, Paragraph 2 of the Korean Civil Code. This means that the exclusion period for the fast solution of the inheritance relationship would be meaningless. Thus, the theory of collective rights that assumes the claim for recovery of succession is the collection of individual rights of claim makes sense. Second, with respect to the legal nature of the claim for recovery of succession, the Korean Supreme Court initially viewed from the perspective of the theory of independent rights, but has took a viewpoint from the perspective of the theory of collective rights since early 1980s. Third, by analysing the relationship between individual rights of claim such as the claim for property returns, the claim for article in possession returns, the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment, the claim for compensation due to torts and the claim for recovery of succession, this article concludes that it is appropriate to understand the legal nature of the claim for recovery of succession from the view of the theory of collective rights.
참고문헌 (57)
- 郭潤直, "相續法" (2004), 博英社
- 權龍雨, "物權法" (2001), 法文社
- 權龍雨, "民法演習" (1996), 法文社
- 金容漢, "親族相續法" (2004), 博英社
- 金容漢, "改稿 新民法大意(下)" (1964), 博英社
- 金疇洙, "註釋 親族ㆍ相續法" (1993), 法文社
- 金疇洙, "親族ㆍ相續法" (2008), 法文社
- 朴東涉, "親族ㆍ相續法 解說" (1994), 청림출판
- 朴秉濠, "家族法" (1991), 韓國放送通信大學 出版部
- 송영곤, "民法의 爭點(Ⅱ)" (2005), 유스티아누스
- 李庚熙, "家族法" (2004), 法元社
- 李根植, "新親族相續法" (1982), 一潮閣
- 張庚鶴, "新稿 親族相續法" (1963), 서울考試學會
- 鄭光鉉, "新親族相續法要論" (1962), 法文社
- 池元, "民法講義" (2007), 弘文社
- 玄勝鍾, "로마法" (1996), 法文社
- 金曾漢 代表編輯, "註釋民法(下)" (1972), 韓國司法行政學會
- 加藤雅信, "現代民法學の展開" (1991), 有斐閣
- 近藤英吉, "相續法論(上)" (1936), 弘文堂
- 柚木馨, "判例 相續法論" (1953), 有斐閣
- 有泉亨, "新版 親族法ㆍ相續法" (1971), 弘文堂
- Lange, H, "Lehrbuch des Erbrechts" (1978), Mὒnchen
- "Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch Bd. 6", München, ~ (1982)
- 姜秉燮, "相續回復請求의 訴", 大韓辯護士協會誌 (1986), 大韓辯護士協會
- 權龍雨, "財産相續回復請求權", 月刊考試, 18(4) (1991)
- 金成泰, "相續回復請求權에 관한 硏究", 석사, pp.2004
- 金在晋, "相續回復請求權에 관하여, in 家庭法院事件의 諸問題(裁判資料 18집, 法院行政處)" (1983), 法文社
- 金疇洙, "相續回復請求權", 判例月報, (133) (1981)
- 金疇洙, "共同相續人 사이의 相續回復請求權과 除斥期間", 判例月報, (262) (1992)
- 金鎭鉉, "相續回復請求權의 比較法的 考察", 社會科學硏究, 17 (1982), 江原大
- 金玄玉, "相續回復請求權에 관한 硏究", 석사, pp.2003
- 朴秉濠, "相續回復請求權 管見, in 民法學論叢(郭潤直 교수 華甲紀念論文集)" (1985), 博英社
- 朴秉濠, "相續回復請求의 被告適格, in 民事判例硏究(民事判例硏究會)" (1986), 博英社
- 朴英植, "相續回復請求權의 性質", 民事判例硏究, Ⅲ (1993), 民事判例硏究會
- 朴英植, "相續回復請求權과 物權的 請求權과의 關係", 民事裁判의諸問題, 2 (1980), 民事實務硏究會
- 朴英植, "相續回復請求權과 物權的請求權과의 關係(上)", 司法行政 (1978)
- 朴英植, "相續回復請求權의 性質", 法曹, 29(3) (1980), 法曹協會
- 朴運吉, "相續回復請求權에 관한 問題點", 法學論叢, 9 (2003), 朝鮮大
- 박종렬, "상속회복청구권의 법적 성질", 法學論叢, 9 (2003), 朝鮮大
- 박 철, "상속회복청구권의 성질과 제도적 취지에 관한 연구, in: 民事判例硏究(民事判例硏究會)" (2003), 박영사
- 徐廷友, "被相續人의 死亡後 認知審判의 確定과 相續回復請求權 消滅 상속회복청구권의 성질 705 期間의 進行", －대법원 1978. 2. 14. 제3부 판결 77므21 相續回復 및 相續財産分轄請求事件－, ~ (1978), 司法行政
- 申性澤, "財産相續回復請求權에 關하여", 司法論集, 10 (1979), 法院行政處
- 申榮鎬, "“相續回復請求權의 法的 性質”－대법원 1991년 12월 24일자 전원합의체판결을 중심으로－", 家族法硏究, (10) (1996), 韓國家族法硏究會
- 吳昌洙, "相續回復請求權과 除斥期間", 判例月報, (259) (1992)
- 尹眞秀, "相續回復請求權의 硏究”－歷史的 및 比較法的 究察－", 法學, 41(1) (2000), 서울大
- 李東律, "相續回復請求權의 問題點", 檀國法學, 6 (1997), 檀國大 天安캠퍼스
- 李相京, "財産相續回復請求權論(上)", 人權과 正義 (1996), 大韓辯護士協會
- 李相京, "財産相續回復請求權論(下)", 인권과 정의 (1996), 대한변호사협회
- 李相泰, "相續回復請求權의 性質", 論文集, 2 (1987), 淑明女大 現代社會發展硏究所
- 李勝雨, "相續回復請求權의 性質", 論文集, 12 (1991), 韓國放送通信大
- 李和淑, "相續回復請求權과 物權請求權과의 關係", 考試硏究, 25(9) (1998)
- 李和淑, "相續回復請求權, in 民法學의 回顧와 展望(民法典 施行 30周年紀念論文集)" (1993), 韓國司法行政學會
- 林正平, "相續回復請求權의 性質과 他制度와의 關係 小考", 法學論叢, 28 (2005), 檀國大
- 장창국, "상속회복청구권에 관한 판례의 검토", 재판실무, 3 (2005), 창원지방법원
- 鄭範錫, "相續回復請求權의 問題點", 法曹, 18(12) (1969), 法曹協會
- 정해상, "相續回復請求權의 法理", 中央法學, (창간) (1999), 中央大
- 諸哲雄, "相續回復請求權", 한림법학 FORUM, 6 (1997), 한림대