法律行爲의 要件體系와 土地去來許可
The Conditions of Contract and the Permission of Land Transaction
1
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The Article 118 of Program and Utilization for National Land Development Act provides that one who shall buy or sell the land must be acquire the gourvernment's permission, for restraint the speculative trade of real estate in particular area. It also provides that the land transaction contract without such permission should be ineffective. However the general view and judicial precedents have interpreted the Article based on the Doctrine of Floating Void. Under this doctrine, a party could not demend the performance of the obligation, because prior to the permission, the contract does not carry it into effect. As legal obligations, the contracting parties must cooperate for getting the permission. If the permission is granted, the contract shall become valid definitely. But this doctrine cannot bar effectively any speculative trades. Moreover it is a theoretical repugnance that the legal duty of cooperation for getting the permission is based upon the validity of contract, while the contract without permission is null and void. Therefore it is necessary to conceive a new idea for solution of this matter. It is appropriate view that the contract without permission is valid, provided that its effect ought to be suspended until the acquisition of permission. This article suggests that the permission for land transaction is the special condition. For the conditions of general contract, the general view have interpreted them to devide the condition of conclusion and the condition of effect. But this division of conception is incorrect from a different standpoint. In view of the nature of contract, it cannot be admitted that a contract concluded is ineffective. I think that there two kinds of conditions for the effective contract. The one is general conditions, that is to say, contractant of capacity, corrective intention, accordance of offer and acceptance, moral and lawful purposes, the other one is special conditions, that is to say, right representative, acquisition of permission, achievement of suspended condition, etc. Therefore I suggests that all contracts are effective when the general condition is fulfilled, and the legal duty of cooperation for getting the permission ought to be recognized from the provisional validity of contract. And also suggests, the contract carries it into effect definitely when the special condition(permission) is fulfilled, and therefore the obligations of contractant, such as payment and registration, are actualized by the acquisition of permission.
Abstract
The Article 118 of Program and Utilization for National Land Development Act provides that one who shall buy or sell the land must be acquire the gourvernment's permission, for restraint the speculative trade of real estate in particular area. It also provides that the land transaction contract without such permission should be ineffective. However the general view and judicial precedents have interpreted the Article based on the Doctrine of Floating Void. Under this doctrine, a party could not demend the performance of the obligation, because prior to the permission, the contract does not carry it into effect. As legal obligations, the contracting parties must cooperate for getting the permission. If the permission is granted, the contract shall become valid definitely. But this doctrine cannot bar effectively any speculative trades. Moreover it is a theoretical repugnance that the legal duty of cooperation for getting the permission is based upon the validity of contract, while the contract without permission is null and void. Therefore it is necessary to conceive a new idea for solution of this matter. It is appropriate view that the contract without permission is valid, provided that its effect ought to be suspended until the acquisition of permission. This article suggests that the permission for land transaction is the special condition. For the conditions of general contract, the general view have interpreted them to devide the condition of conclusion and the condition of effect. But this division of conception is incorrect from a different standpoint. In view of the nature of contract, it cannot be admitted that a contract concluded is ineffective. I think that there two kinds of conditions for the effective contract. The one is general conditions, that is to say, contractant of capacity, corrective intention, accordance of offer and acceptance, moral and lawful purposes, the other one is special conditions, that is to say, right representative, acquisition of permission, achievement of suspended condition, etc. Therefore I suggests that all contracts are effective when the general condition is fulfilled, and the legal duty of cooperation for getting the permission ought to be recognized from the provisional validity of contract. And also suggests, the contract carries it into effect definitely when the special condition(permission) is fulfilled, and therefore the obligations of contractant, such as payment and registration, are actualized by the acquisition of permission.
참고문헌 (86)
- 姜台星, "民法總則" (2003), 大明出版社
- 高翔龍, "民法總則" (2003), 法文社
- 高翔龍, "民法學特講" (1995), 法文社
- 郭潤直, "民法總則" (1999), 博英社
- 金庚烈, "新土地公法" (1992), 經營文化院
- 金基善, "韓國民法總則" (1991), 法文社
- 金南辰, "行政法 Ⅰ" (1995), 法文社
- 金南辰, "行政法 Ⅰ" (2005), 法文社
- 金東熙, "行政法 Ⅰ" (2007), 博英社
- 金玟中, "民法講義" (1997), 斗聖社
- 金相容, "民法總則" (2000), 法文社
- 金性洙, "一般行政法" (2008), 法文社
- 金容漢, "民法總則論" (1989), 博英社
- 金旭坤, "編輯代表 金曾漢", pp.527~597 (1985), 韓國司法行政學會
- 金在德, "土地所有權制限의 理論" (1983), 經營文化院
- 金疇洙, "民法總則" (2004), 三英社
- 金俊鎬, "民法講義" (2000), 法文社
- 金曾漢, "民法總則" (1983), 博英社
- 金曾漢, "民法總則" (2001), 博英社
- 金鐵容, "行政法 Ⅰ" (2008), 博英社
- 金亨培, "民法學講義" (2008), 新潮社
- 朴均省, "行政法論(上)" (2003), 博英社
- 朴鈗炘, "行政法講義(上)" (1999), 博英社
- 白泰昇, "民法總則" (2000), 法文社
- 石琮顯, "일반행정법(상)" (2003), 三英社
- 宋德洙, "民法講義(上)" (2004), 博英社
- 劉尙炫, "行政法 Ⅰ" (2003), 螢雪出版社
- 柳至泰, "行政法新論" (2003), 新英社
- 李英俊, "民法總則" (2007), 博英社
- 李銀榮, "物權法" (2000), 博英社
- 李銀榮, "民法總則" (2000), 博英社
- 李太載, "民法總則" (1981), 法文社
- 張庚鶴, "民法總則" (1995), 法文社
- 池元林, "民法講義" (2007), 弘文社
- 한견우, "현대행정법강의" (2007), 新英社
- 洪性載, "民法總則" (2003), 大永文化社
- 洪井善, "行政法原論(上)" (2004), 博英社
- 黃迪仁, "民法總則" (1985), 博英社
- 康文鍾, "土地去來 許可(國土利用管理法)를 받지 않고 締結한 賣買契約의 效力", 判例硏究, 2 (1992), 釜山判例硏究會
- 강인상, "토지거래허가구역 내에서의 중간생략등기의 효력 : 대법원 1996. 6.28선고 96다3982판결을 중심으로", 判例硏究 (1999), 全州地方法院
- 姜仁崖, "土地公槪念關係法의 解說國土利用管理法上의 土地去來許可制와 宅地所有上限에 관한 法律 槪觀", 人權과 正義, (175) (1991), 大韓辯護士協會
- 高翔龍, "去來許可區域內土地賣買契約과 事後許可時 有效 與否", 法律新聞, (2110) (1992), 法律新聞社
- 孔淳鎭, "土地去來許可制", 土地法學, (12) (1997), 韓國土地法學會
- 金光泰, "國土利用管理法上의 許可 없이 締結한 土地去來契約", 刑事判例硏究, 1 (1993), 博英社
- 金南辰, "韓國에서의 土地公槪念擴大 導入을 위한 立法", 考試硏究, 17(12) (1990), 考試硏究社
- 金玟中, "流動的 無效 -국토이용관리법상의 토지거래허가를 중심으로-", 法曹, (523) (2002), 法曹協會
- 金相容, "土地去來許可 申告制의 檢討", 民事法學, (8) (1990), 韓國民事法學會
- 金相容, "土地去來許可ㆍ申告制에 관한 考察(Ⅱ)", 34(2) (1989), 國家考試學會
- 金相容, "土地去來許可ㆍ申告制의 檢討", 司法行政, 30(6) (1989), 韓國司法行政學會
- 金相容, "土地去來許可의 法理構成" (1993), 博英社
- 金相容, "土地去來許可의 法理構成", 判例月報, (260) (1992), 判例月報社
- 金相容, "土地去來許可制에 관한 流動的 無效의 法理" (1995), 博英社
- 金正道, "土地去來許可를 받지 아니한 土地賣買契約의 法律關係", 裁判과 判例, 4 (1995), 大邱判例硏究會
- 金駿洙, "不動産去來規制立法의 檢討" (1978), 大韓辯護士協會
- 朴鈗欣, "土地去來契約許可制", 月刊考試, 17(6) (1990), 法志社
- 徐元宇, "土地去來許可制의 違憲與否에 관한 論義(上)(下)", 人權과 正義, (159,160) (1989), 大韓辯護士協會
- 梁承斗, "行政行爲의 內容上 分類에 관한 考察國土 利用官理法上의 許可의 性質을 중심으로" (1991), 博英社
- 梁彰洙, "國土利用管理法上의 去來許可 對象土地에 대한 許可 없는 去來契約의 效力", 考試硏究, 28(7) (2001), 考試硏究社
- 吳昌洙, "土地去來許可를 받지 아니한 去來當事者間의 法律關係", 判例月報, (300) (1995), 判例月報社
- 李尙圭, "土地去來許可制의 憲法的 問題", 判例月報, (245) (1991), 判例月報社
- 李承翰, "土地去來許可를 받지 아니한 去來契約의 效力", 司法硏修生論文集司法硏修院, 22 (1993)
- 李泳揆, "土地去來許可를 要하는 土地去來契約의 法理", 不動産法學, 2 (1991), 韓國不動産法學會
- 李銀榮, "土地去來許可를 조건으로 하는 賣買契約 및 賠償額 豫定의 效力", 判例月報, (255) (1991), 判例月報社
- 李宙興, "土地去來許可를 받지 아니한 土地賣買契約의 效力(上)", 法曹, 39(6)통권 : 405 (1990), 法曹協會
- 李宙興, "土地去來許可를 받지 아니한 土地賣買契約의 效力(下)", 法曹, 39(7)통권 : 406 (1990), 法曹協會
- 李春燮, "土地去來許可制違憲論是非", 人權과 正義, (155) (1989), 大韓辯護士協會
- 李太載, "法律行爲의 要件에 관한 再論", 法政, 77(7) (1977), 韓國司法行政學會
- 鄭然宙, "土地去來許可制에 대한 憲法的 再考察", 司法行政, (379) (1992), 韓國司法行政學會
- 丁玉泰, "流動的 缺效", 司法行政, (379) (1992), 韓國司法行政學會
- 鄭震明, "土地去來許可區域 指定解除가 許可없는 去來契約에 미치는 影響大法院 1999.6.17宣告, 98다40459判決-”", 民事法學, (18) (2000), 韓國民事法學會
- 曺圭昌, "流動的 無效-大法院 基本判例에 대한 批判的 考察-" (1996), 考試界, 國家考試學會
- 陳英光, "土地去來許可制에 관한 私法的 考察" (1993), 仁川法曹 創刊號, 仁川地方辯護士會
- 崔靈圭, "土地去來許可制ㆍ申告制의 몇 가지 問題", 不動産法學, 3 (1995), 韓國不動産法學會
- 韓一煥, "土地去來許可와 建物賣買의 效力", 判例硏究, 8 (1995), 서울地方辯護士會
- 許魯穆, "국토이용관리법상의 규제지역 내의 토지에 대하여 허가받을 것을 전제로 체결한 거래계약의 효력", 衡平과 正義, 7 (1992), 大邱地方辯護士會
- 許榮, "土地去來許可制의 憲法上 問題點", 考試硏究, 16(8) (1989), 考試硏究社
- 홍승진, "법령제명 띄어쓰기 추진경과" (2005), 월간법제, 법제처
- 黃永善, "許可區域內의 土地 등에 對한 許可를 받지 않은 去來契約에 關한 判例의 檢討", 釜山地方辯護士會誌, (12) (1993), 釜山地方辯護士會
- "Dieter Medicus, Allgemeiner Teil des BGB, 6.Aufl., C.F.M?ler, 1994", ~ (1994)
- "Fritz Baur und Rolf St?ner, Lehrbuch des Sachenrechts, 16.Aufl., C.H.Beck, 1992", ~ (1992)
- "Hans Josef Wieling, Sachenrecht, Bd.Ⅰ, Springer Verlag, 1990", ~ (1990)
- "Harm Peter Westermann, Sachenrecht, 7.Aufl., C.F.M?ler, 1998", ~ (1998)
- "Heinz Georg Bamberger und Herbert Roth, Kommentar zum B?gerlichen Gesetzbuch, Bd.2, C.H.Beck, 2003", ~ (2003)
- "Helmut Kohler, BGBㆍAllgemeiner Teil, 22.Aufl., C.H.Beck, 1994", ~ (1994)
- "Karl Larenz und Manfred Wolf, Allgemeiner Teil des B?gerlichen Rechts, 8.Aufl., C.H.Beck, 1997", ~ (1997)
- "Werner Lorenz, Ermann Kommentar, Bd.Ⅱ, 11.Aufl., 2004", ~ (2004)