재산분할청구권의 포기약정에 관한 소고

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The spouses can claim for division of property on divorce. With a divorce, a marriage and all the legal relations (rights and obligations) given by the marriage are terminated. And, a settlement of the parties’ economic affairs that have accumulated during the marriage is required, with consideration for a calculation between the spouses and also a support fee after the separation. The Korean Civil Act provides the claims for division of property on divorce, irrespective of its procedure, divorce by mutual consent between the spouses or judicial divorce by the Family Court (article 839-2, 843).
At first, an agreement between the parties determines the amount and the method, with regard to the dividing a marital property (article 839-2 ②). This agreement means a mutual consent between spouses already divorced, or, intending spouses in anticipation of their divorce. If one of the spouses expresses his/her intention to renounce all the claim for division of property on a process of the mutual consent, his/her intention to renounce the claim for division of property on divorce can be treated as the contents of the spouses’ contract.
In the academic circles, it is undoubtedly true that there has been no animated discussions, with regard to the ways how to deal with the give-up intention or the mutual consent. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court of Korea has settled many disputes relevant to the intention or the agreement, to renounce the claim for division of property, with a series of decisions.
Under the thorough examination of a series of decisions of the Supreme Court concerning the agreement to renounce the claim for division of property on divorce (including the give-up intention expressed on the discussion process), I came up with a conclusion that the agreement should be treated as valid on the ground of the freedom of contract.
I don’t agree with the decision of the Supreme Court, held that an agreement concerning the claim for division of property before divorce is generally invalid (2002Meu1787·2002Meu1794·2002Meu1800, decided March 25, 2003). Under this judicial interpretation, an effectiveness of the agreement is generally conditioned by the time when it is made. But, I think this is not persuasive on various reasons.
A give-up of the claim for division of property means a promise, showing a intention not to ask the division of property in the future. However, the freedom of contract is commonly accepted as general rule. Based on this, I think an agreement to renounce the claim for division of property on divorce should be accepted as valid generally. Sometimes, we may be faced with some interpretative problems. In that cases, a using the general principles, such as the rule of a contract formation and a declaration of intention, the judicial regulation of violations of public(social) policy, the principle of trust and good faith, etc, may be very helpful to settle the disputes.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 오시영, "협의이혼 거부 시 재판상이혼절차에서 협의이혼약정 및 재산분할약정의 효력에 대한 검토" 대한변호사협회 (414) : 36-52, 2011

2 엄경천, "한쪽에만 너무 불리한 이혼 전 재산분할포기각서는 무효"

3 배경숙, "친족상속법강의" 제일법규 2006

4 윤진수, "친족상속법 강의" 박영사 2016

5 김용한, "친족상속법" 박영사 2003

6 송덕수, "친족상속법" 박영사 2016

7 오시영, "친족상속법" 학현사 2011

8 박동섭, "친족상속법" 박영사 2013

9 김주수, "친족·상속법" 법문사 2016

10 서종희, "청산적 재산분할과 부양적 재산분할의 독립과 ‘2분의 1 원칙’에 대한 재고 -Miller v.Miller 사건과 오오무라 아츠시(大村敦志)의 입법제안의 시사점-" 법학연구원 20 (20): 119-146, 2013

11 송덕수, "채권법총론" 박영사 2015

12 윤진수, "주해친족법 제1권과 제2권" 박영사 [서울] 2015

13 김형작, "재산분할 합의 내지 약정의 효력에 관하여 실무상 문제되었던 사례 검토를 위주로" 서울가정법원 가사재판연구회 1 : 2007

14 윤진수, "재산법과 비교한 가족법의 특성 - 가족법의 이타성과 합리성" 한국민사법학회 (36) : 579-612, 2007

15 한삼인, "이혼시 재산분할의 제 문제 판례연구를 중심으로" 고시연구사 27 (27): 2000

16 김수정, "사법논집 제40집" 법원도서관 2005

17 윤우일, "부부재산약정제도의 활성화 방안" 법학연구소 29 : 327-351, 2013

18 김병두, "부부재산계약론" 한국가족법학회 16 (16): 4-166, 2002

19 전혜정, "부부재산계약" 경북대학교 2005

20 송덕수, "민법 핵심판례200선" 박영사 2016

21 최금숙, "로스쿨 친족법[Ⅱ. 약혼·혼인·이혼편]" 제일법규 2010

22 신영호, "로스쿨 가족법강의" 세창출판사 2013

23 박종권, "로스쿨 가족법" 청림출판 2007

24 민유숙, "대법원 판례해설 통권44호" 법원도서관 2004

25 전경근, "가족법판례해설" 세창출판사 2009

26 정구태, "遺留分返還請求權이 債權者代位權의 目的이 되는지 與否 ―日本에서의 論議를 바탕으로 한 從來 國內의 通說에 대한 批判的 檢討―" 한국가족법학회 22 (22): 205-256, 2008

27 中川善之助, "身分法の総則的課題 : 身分権及び身分行為" 岩波書店 1941

28 윤진수, "民法改正案 중 夫婦財産制에 관한 연구" 한국가족법학회 21 (21): 107-132, 2007

29 窪田充見, "家族法" 有斐閣 2013

30 大村敦志, "家族法" 有斐閣 2013

31 박현정, "夫婦財産契約上의 契約自由原則" 한국재산법학회 32 (32): 179-198, 2016

32 양창수, "「가족법」상의 법률행위의 특성" 한국가족법학회 19 (19): 71-103, 2005