일상가사대리권과 일상가사채무 연대책임과의 관계
The difference between the mutual agency of wife/husband and joint debt of household affairs in married life
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
From a viewpoint of comparative legal study, Korean civil law uniquely has provisions of mutual agency of wife/husband for family matters(section 827) and joint debt of household affairs(section 832). However the relation of those provisions still remains a problem under discussion, there are some opinions that they are indiscriminate or redundant. In my opinion, they are neither indiscriminate nor redundant for the reasons that ① the discrimination between mutual agency of wife/husband for family matters and joint debt of household affairs can be found in a judicial decision of korean supreme court, ② it is illogical to interpret section 827 as ‘representation’ in disregard of “agency” in a regal wording of the provision, ③ these provisions don’t have the relation of cause and effect, because joint debt of household affairs can raise in addition to mutual agency of wife/husband for family matters, ④ there are a peculiar function and an inherent sphere in each provision.
Abstract
From a viewpoint of comparative legal study, Korean civil law uniquely has provisions of mutual agency of wife/husband for family matters(section 827) and joint debt of household affairs(section 832). However the relation of those provisions still remains a problem under discussion, there are some opinions that they are indiscriminate or redundant. In my opinion, they are neither indiscriminate nor redundant for the reasons that ① the discrimination between mutual agency of wife/husband for family matters and joint debt of household affairs can be found in a judicial decision of korean supreme court, ② it is illogical to interpret section 827 as ‘representation’ in disregard of “agency” in a regal wording of the provision, ③ these provisions don’t have the relation of cause and effect, because joint debt of household affairs can raise in addition to mutual agency of wife/husband for family matters, ④ there are a peculiar function and an inherent sphere in each provision.
참고문헌 (12)
- 곽윤직, "채권총론" (1999), 박영사
- 김주수, "한국가족법과 과제" (1993), 삼영사
- 김주수, "친족․상속법 (제8판)" (2005), 법문사
- 김주수, "일상가사대리권과 가사로 인한 채무의 연대책임", 경희법학, 9(2) (1971)
- 이화숙, "비교 부부재산관계법" (2000), 세창출판사
- 이화숙, "부부별산제와 일상가사대리권, 그리고 표현대리와의 긴장관계", 민사법학, (14) (1996)
- 이희배, "일상가사대리에서의 월권행위와 표현대리의 적용 - 재산법상의 대리와의 이동점과 관련하여 -", 가족법학논문집, 이희배 교수정년기념논문집, ~
- 임성권, "일상가사대리권과 표현대리", 법학연구, 인하대학교 법학연구소
- 최봉경, "日常家事代理權과 그로 인한 夫婦連帶責任의상호관계에 관한 해석론― 남북문제에 관한 국제사법적 관점을 겸하여 ―", 서울대학교 법학, 46(4), pp.54~83 (2005), 법학연구소
- 홍춘의, "일상가사의 범위", 판례월보, (355) (2000), 판례월보사
- 三島宗彦, "家族法大系 II: 日常家事債務と連帶責任" (1969), 有斐閣
- 人見康子, "新版․判例演習 民法5: 夫婦間の日常家事代理權と表見代理" (1984), 有斐閣