소아성 당뇨병에 속발한 뇌칸디다증의 부검 1예

최환주,장희경,이선경 대한병리학회 1984 Journal of Pathology and Translational Medicine Vol.18 No.3

미등기주택 임차인의 대지환가대금에 대한 우선변제권 - 대법원 2007. 6. 21. 2004다26133 전원합의체 판결 -

최환주 한국민사법학회 2008 民事法學 Vol.43 No.1

The house lease protection law is the special law of the civil law that is established to protect the lessee, the economic disadvantaged, for the purpose of the safety of the residential life of the nation. Under the present situation that the lease security in the large amount is exchanged like our country, the biggest concern of the lessee is whether the lease security money can be repaid when the lease period is expired. In order that such lease security money may be surely repaid, the law recognizes the opposing power and the priority repayment right for the lessee, and such priority repayment right is the unique system existing only in our country. The objective legal case has judged the important decision for the priority repayment right. Firstly, it recognizes the priority repayment right even to the lessee of the unregistered house. It is wholly agreed. The application objective of this law gives no difference between the registered house and the unregistered one, and the previous legal case recognized the opposing power for the unregistered house only but it is not sufficient to protect the lessee with the opposing power only. Also, if the priority repayment right is not recognized, the house owner and the land owner will take the illegal benefit through the lessee's sacrifice, and even if the priority repayment right is recognized, because it is not regarded that the benefit of the mortgagee, who establishes the security right by previously recognizing the unregistered house and existence of the lessee, will be infringed. Secondly, in case the house owner and the land owner are different, it is said that the priority repayment right will be recognized in the proceeds despite whoever the land owner may be. Because it is said that the priority repayment right is the legal security. However, it is accepted that the priority repayment right is recognized in the objective leading case but it is difficult to agree to it as there is any problem in composition of the legal principles. The priority repayment right has the characteristics of the legal mortgage but it is difficult to be regarded as the right for anybody to assert it to the end, and if so, the benefit with other interest concerned can not help being contradictory. In the personal viewpoint, even if the house owner and the land owner are different, the priority repayment right shall be recognized only in case the land owner is under the position of the transferee of the leased house. In order that the auction objective may receive the allotment from the land amount, the lessee shall be able to oppose against the land owner through the repayment claim for lease security money, and for this, the land owner shall be in the position of the transferee of the leased house. Finally, as the proposal of legislative theory, this law protects the lessee as the special law of the civil law, but on the other hand, it shall be harmonized with the benefit of other interests concerned. Despite there were a lot of disputes and legal discussions for this law as far, there was much disputable room in the interpretation as this law consists of 13 provisions merely. As for the second disputable case for the objective legal one also, Term 2, Clause 5 of the lease protective law for the commerce- residence purposed house regulates that the priority repayment right shall be recognized only in case of the land owned by the lessor. Therefore, in order that the priority repayment right may be recognized in the land sales amount under this law, the law shall be legislated only to the case that the land is the one owned by the lessor of the leased house (inclusive of the transferee of the leased house), and therefore, it shall let them enjoy the stable residential life by removing the room for the criticism and dispute between the lessee and the interest concerned.

2015년 민사집행법 중요 판례

최환주 대한변호사협회 2016 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.456

A Study on Representative Precedents under the Civil Execution Act in 2015 In 2015, about 40 judicial precedents were delivered by the Supreme Court concerning the Civil Execution Act. This study selected the juridically and practically important precedents whose fact relevance, abstract of judgment, and review were analyzed in turn. These precedents include ① Supreme Court Decision 2013Da27152 decided October 29, 2015, concerning whether a single relationship of lease may be established on each sectioned store on a blanket basis according to a standard for determining the scope of tenants to be preferentially reimbursed under Article 14 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act; ② Supreme Court Decision 2012Da60329 decided December 24, 2014, concerning whether the right to lease on a deposit basis with counterforce in a public auction procedure under the former National Tax Collection Act may be taken over by purchasers regardless of a request for distribution, not being terminated through the sale; ③ Supreme Court Order 2014Ma2242 dated February 3, 2015, concerning whether other claims may be seized doubly if in the seizure of monetary claim the face value of a claim to be seized exceeds a creditor’s execution claim and costs; and ④ Supreme Court Decision 2013Da60982 decided July 9, 2015, concerning whether, after a garnishee repays his debt to either an execution creditor from a disposition for failure of payment or a creditor who has received a seizure and collection order from civil execution proceedings, this garnishee may be exempted from obligation by alleging the termination of his obligation on the paid portions or by depositing the amount of his debt according to Article 248(1) of the Civil Execution Act. The present study focuses on the selection, review, and introduction of the important judicial precedents in 2015 (as of the date of issue of the Publication of Cases). Thus, further studies are needed on the in-depth research and detailed comments for each judicial precedent. 2015년 한 해 동안 민사집행법 분야에 대한 대법원 판례가 40여개 정도 선고되었다. 본고는이 중 법리적, 실무적으로 중요하다고 판단되는 판례들을 선별하여 그 판례의 사실관계, 판결요지, 검토 순으로 분석해 보았다. 여기에 해당하는 판례로는, ① 상가건물임대차보호법 제14조에 의하여 우선변제를 받을 임차인의 범위를 판단하는 기준에서 구분점포 각각에 대하여 일괄하여 단일한 임대차관계가 성립한 것으로 볼 수 있는지에 관한 대법원 2015. 10. 29. 선고 2013다27152 판결, ② 구 국세징수법상 공매절차에서 대항력 있는 전세권은 배분요구와 무관하게 매각으로 소멸하지 않고 매수인에게 인수되는지 여부에 관한 대법원 2014. 12. 24. 선고 2012다60329 판결, ③ 금전채권의 압류에서 피압류채권의 액면가액이 채권자의 집행채권 및집행비용을 초과하는 경우, 다른 채권을 중복하여 압류할 수 있는지 여부에 관한 대법원 2015. 2. 3. 자2014마2242 결정, ④ 제3채무자가 체납처분에 따른 압류채권자와 민사집행절차에서 압류 및 추심명령을받은 채권자 중 어느 한쪽에게 채무를 변제하고 변제 부분에 대한 채무의 소멸을 주장하거나, 민사집행법제248조 제1항에 따른 집행공탁을 하여 면책될 수 있는지 여부에 관한 대법원 2015. 7. 9. 선고 2013다60982 판결 등이 있다. 여기에서는 2015년도(판례공보 발행일자 기준)의 중요판례를 선별하여 고찰, 소개하는 자리인 만큼 개개의 판례에 대한 보다 심층적인 연구와 평석에 대하여는 별도의 필자와 지면을 기대해 본다.

2016년 민사집행법중요 판례

최환주 大韓辯護士協會 2017 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.464

2016년 한 해 동안 민사집행법 분야에 대한 대법원 판례가 30개 정도 선고되었다. 본고는 이 중 법리적, 실무적으로 중요하다고 판단되는 판례들을 선정하여 그 판례의 사실관계, 판결요지, 검토 순으로 분석해 보았다. 여기에 해당하는 판례로는, ① 환경분쟁 조정법에 의한 재정의 경우, 재정 문서의 송달을 공시송달의 방법으로 할 수 있는지 여부 및 재정 문서가 송달되지 않는 경우 청구이의의 소를 제기할 수 있는지에 관한 대법원 2016. 4. 15. 선고 2015다201510 판결, ② 경매절차상의 근저당권자가 유치권 신고를 한 사람을 상대로 유치권의 부존재 확인을 구한 경우 유치권 신고를 한 사람이 피담보채권으로 주장하는 금액 중 일부만 경매절차에서 유치권으로 대항할 수 있는 경우, 법원이 취할 조치(=유치권 부분에 대한 일부패소 판결)에 관한 대법원 2016. 3. 10. 선고 2013다99409 판결, ③ 공정증서를 집행권원으로 하는 금전채권에 대한 강제집행절차에서, 청구권의 기초가 된 법률행위에 무효사유가 있으나 채권압류 및 전부명령이 적법하게 확정된 경우, 법률행위의 무효사유를 내세워 확정된 전부명령에 따라 전부채권자에게 피전부채권이 이전되는 효력 자체를 부정할 수 있는지 여부에 관한 대법원 2016. 3. 24. 선고 2015다248137 판결, ④ 부동산에 대한 가압류가 집행된 후 가압류가 강제경매개시결정으로 본압류로 이행되었으나, 그 경매개시결정이 이중경매개시결정인 경우, 채무자나 이해관계인이 가압류에 대한 취소를 구할 이익이 있는지 여부에 관한 대법원 2016. 3. 24. 자 2013마1412 결정 등이 있다. 여기에서는 2016년도(판례공보 발행일자 기준)의 중요판례를 선정하여 고찰, 소개하는 자리인 만큼 개개의 판례에 대한 보다 심층적인 연구와 평석에 대하여는 별도의 필자와 지면을 기대해 본다. A Study on Representative Precedents under the Civil Execution Act in 2016 In 2016, about 30 important judicial determinations were delivered by the Supreme Court in the area involving the Civil Execution Act. This study selected some of these important precedents and analyzed the relevant facts, and the abstract of judgments, and reviewed the significance of the same. These precedents include ① Supreme Court Decision 2015Da201510 decided October 29, 2015, concerning whether service of arbitration petition can be effectuated by publication and whether there can be a collateral attack when such papers have not been properly served; ② Supreme Court Decision 2013Da99409, decided March 10, 2016, on the issues regarding what measures the court can take (denying partial relief against the lien holder) when a possessive lien holder can defend his lien on partially against non-secured claims in foreclosure proceedings; ③ Supreme Court Decision 2015Da248137, dated March 24, 2016, concerning whether the status of the holder of set off claims can be comprehensively denied on the ground of nullification of the legal act, where there was a ground for nullification for the underlying legal transaction, but the attachment order and the set off order were properly made; and ④ Supreme Court Decision 2013Ma1412, decided March 24, 2016, concerning whether, the debtor has an interest in seeking to set aside the preliminary attachment, where the preliminary attachment has bee executed and converted into full attachment after the decision to commence foreclosure, yet the foreclosure decision was a double foreclosure decision. The present study focuses on the selection, review, and introduction of the important judicial precedents in 2016 (as of the date of issue of the Publication of Cases in Official Reporter). Thus, further studies are needed for the in-depth research and detailed comments upon each judicial precedent.

2020년 민사소송법 중요판례평석

최환주 대한변호사협회 2021 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.497

In 2020, The Supreme Court delivered various types of judgment including two en banc decisions on the Civil Procedure Act. This study selected the juridically and practically important precedents, whose relevant facts, summaries of holdings, and my review thereto were analyzed in this order. Eight major Supreme Court decisions in this paper are classified as ① party, ② institution of lawsuit, ③ pleading, ④ res judicata, and ⑤ multi-party litigation. The present study focuses on the selection, review and introduction of the important judicial precedents in 2020. Thus, further studies are needed on the in-depth research and detailed comments for each judicial precedent. 2020년 한 해 동안 대법원은 민사소송법 분야에서 전원합의체 판결 2건을 포함하여 다양한 유형의 판결들을 선고하였다. 이 글은 그 중 법리적, 실무적으로 중요하다고 판단되는 판례들을 선정하여 그 판례의 사실관계, 판결요지, 평석 순으로 분석한 것이다. 본문에서는 8개의 대법원 판결을 (i) 당사자, (ii) 소의 제기, (iii) 변론, (ⅳ) 기판력, (ⅴ) 다수당사자소송의 다섯 분야로 나누어 보았다. 여기에서는 2020년의 중요판례를 선정하여 고찰, 소개하는 자리인 만큼 개개의 판례에 대한 보다 심층적인 연구와 평석에 대하여는 별도의 필자와 지면을 기대해 본다.

원발성 경화성 간세포암 1 예

최환주,심영웅,서대홍,김춘섭,송갑영,임홍섭,김충기,이겸철 대한내과학회 1997 대한내과학회지 Vol.53 No.2

Hepatoma is one of the most common malignant disease among cancers that occur in Korea. Recently, according ta developing imaging diagnostic technology and non surgical treatment the hepatoma is easily detected in early diagnosis and appropriate treatment. From this point of view, the histologic pattern of hepatoma is markedly important. This is the first reported case of sclerosing hepatocellular carcinoma, which is characterized by intense fibrosis, in which the tubular neoplastic structures are embedded. The incidence of sclerosing hepatocellular carcinoma is very rare. Therefore the rare histologic pattern of hepatoma might be introduced by many studies and reports. We recently experienced a case of sclerosing hepatocellular carcinoma.

2017년 민사집행법 중요 판례

최환주 대한변호사협회 2018 人權과 正義 : 大韓辯護士協會誌 Vol.- No.473

In 2017, about 40 judicial precedents were handed down by the Supreme Court in the area of the Civil Execution Act. This study selected the juridically and practically important precedents, whose relevant facts, summaries of holdings, and my review thereto were analyzed in this order. These precedents include ① Supreme Court Decision 2013Da80627 decided April 7, 2017, concerning the effect of indirect specific injunction, concerning whether parties can challenge the cancellation of enforcement judgment based on defective indirect injunction in a suit against grant of the judgment, and concerning the nature of jurisdiction for such suits; ②③ Supreme Court Decision 2016Da228215 decided December 1, 2016 and Supreme Court Decision 2016Da248431, decided April 7, 2017 concerning a confirmation of a no-rent lease issued by lessee and the principle of good faith and fair dealing for the buyer in a foreclosure proceeding; and ④ Supreme Court Decision 2016Da28897, decided January 25, 2017, concerning whether, after the attachment to a piece of real property nullified for no apparent cause and the property was subsequently transferred to a third party through a foreclosure sale, the effect of the cancelled attachment persisted; ⑤ Supreme Court decision 2016Da38685, decided January 12, 2017 regarding the effective time of the corrective order filed and confirmed after the process on payment order was delivered to a third party debtor; ⑥ Supreme Court decision 2014da30803, decided June 29, 2017 regarding, when B & C place liens on a piece of real property owned by A, and D subsequently places attachment on the same, whether D has a standing to bring a suit to clarify the nature of B’s lien and the remedies thereto; ⑦ Supreme Court decision 2017Da216981, decided May 31, 2017 regarding whether, when a creditor obtains a preliminary injunction prohibiting the transfer of real property against a debtor, and the debtor with another cotenant agree to a division of property through a mediation, this division of property may constitute a transfer prohibited by the injunction; ⑧ Supreme Court Decision 2015Ma1383, decided October 19, 2017 regarding whether a third party who has obtained and recorded real property that has been previously subject to a preliminary attachment but the attachment was subsequently cancelled due to the enforcement of a cancellation order, has the right to defend against the creditor who had the attachment with this acquisition of the property. The present study focuses on the selection, review, and introduction of the important judicial precedents in 2017(as of the date of issue of the Publication of Cases). Thus, further studies are needed on the in-depth research and detailed comments for each judicial precedent. 2017년 한 해 동안 민사집행법 분야에 대한 대법원 판례가 40개 정도 선고되었다. 본고는 이 중 법리적, 실무적으로 중요하다고 판단되는 판례들을 선정하여 그 판례의 사실관계, 판결요지, 검토 순으로 분석해 보았다. 여기에 해당하는 판례로는, ① 간접강제결정의 효력과 무효인 간접강제결정에 대하여 부여된 집행문의 취소를 집행문부여에 대한 이이의 소로 다툴 수 있는지 및 이때 집행문부여에 대한 이이의 소의 관할이 전속관할인지 여부에 관한 대법원 2017. 4. 7. 선고 2013다80627 판결, ② ③ 임차인이 작성한 무상임대차 확인서와 경매절차에서의 매수인에 대한 신의칙에 관한 대법원 2016. 12. 1. 선고 2016다228215 판결과 대법원 2017. 4. 7. 선고 2016다248431 판결, ④ 부동산에 대한 가압류등기가 원인 없이 말소된 이후에 부동산이 양도되고 제3취득자의 채권자에 의해 경매절차가 진행되어 매수인이 매각대금을 다 낸 경우, 원인 없이 말소된 가압류의 효력이 소멸하는지 여부에 관한 대법원 2017. 1. 25. 선고 2016다28897 판결, ⑤ 채권압류 및 추심명령이 제3채무자에게 송달된 후 경정결정이 확정되는 경우, 경정결정의 효력발생시기에 관한 대법원 2017. 1. 12. 선고 2016다38658 판결, ⑥ 甲 소유의 부동산에 관하여 乙 명의의 가등기, 丙 명의의 가압류등기가 순차 마쳐진 경우 후순위 가압류권자 丙이 선순위 乙 명의의 가등기가 담보목적 가등기인지 확인의 소를 구할 이익이 있는지 여부 및 가압류권자의 직접적인 권리구제 방법에 관한 대법원 2017. 6. 29. 선고 2014다30803 판결, ⑦ 가처분채권자가 가처분채무자의 공유 지분에 관하여 처분금지가처분등기를 마친 후 가처분채무자가 나머지 공유자와 경매를 통한 공유물분할을 내용으로 하는 화해권고결정을 받아 확정시킨 경우, 처분금지가처분에서 금하는 처분행위에 해당하는지 여부에 관한 대법원 2017. 5. 31. 선고 2017다216981 판결, ⑧ 가처분취소결정의 집행으로 처분금지가처분등기가 말소된 경우, 가처분등기가 마쳐져 있던 상태에서 부동산을 양수하여 소유권이전등기를 마친 제3자가 소유권취득의 효력으로 가처분채권자에게 대항할 수 있는지 여부에 관한 대법원 2017. 10. 19. 자 2015마1383 결정 등이 있다. 여기에서는 2017년도(판례공보 발행일자 기준)의 중요판례를 선정하여 고찰, 소개하는 자리인 만큼 개개의 판례에 대한 보다 심층적인 연구와 평석에 대하여는 별도의 필자와 지면을 기대해 본다.

가압류 후 매매된 부동산에 대해 현 소유자의 채권자가 신청한 경매에서 그 가압류의 말소 여부 -대상판결 : 2007. 4. 13. 선고 2005다8682판결-

최환주 전남대학교 법학연구소 2012 법학논총 Vol.32 No.2

Attachment is a provisional remedy that potentially seizes the debtor’s property as collateral in order to facilitate the enforcement of monetary obligations and other obligations that can be converted into money. Once granted, this remedy effectively prohibits all possible alienation transactions over the property at issue,such as sale, gift, or security transactions. This is the so called prohibition of alienation effect. With respect to this effect, there have been lots of debates in among academic circles and practitioners as to whether the original applicant of the attachment, a creditor of the previous debtor, can participate in the distribution,after the ownership of the property has changed hands at a foreclosure sale by a current creditor, as to whether the attachment is terminated if the applicant participates or is allowed in distribution, and/or as to whether the attachments is simply transferred to the successful bidder at the foreclosure sale. The case being reviewed here is a significant one as a case of first impression. This paper reviews its issues and the propriety of its legal analysis and conclusions. As for the first issue of “whether the applicant of the previous debtor can participate in distribution, and in case of distribution, the registered attachment terminates,” this paper supports the reasoning and the conclusions reached by the court. As for the second conclusions that “the attachment does not terminate,because, in light of all the circumstances, it appears that the enforcement court processed the foreclosure procedure with the assumption that the attachment registration is maintained and that it passes onto the bidder,” I concur with the conclusion itself, yet I have different views about the reasoning behind it. The issue of termination or transfer of the registration of attachment is a term in the foreclosure sale, and, as the attachment itself shall terminate at a foreclosure sale regardless of whether it is against the previous owner or the current owner, it is a legal condition for sale. Accordingly, it a legal condition is modified (from termination to transfer), it becomes a special term for foreclosure. Therefore, it would be legally clearer and more logical if the court simply held that, because the transfer of attachment was a special condition for sale, the attachment transferred. Finally, we need to think about clarifying the sale conditions legislatively, as foreclosure procedure involves many interested parties and the terms cannot be privately determined. The terms for sale are already set forth under the relevant law, and likewise, the conditions for attachment transfer or termination shall be clearly defined to clarify which survives and which terminates. Therefore, a legislative solution is needed so as for the interested parties to predict the results before they decide to participate in foreclosure. 가압류란 금전채권이나 금전으로 환산할 수 있는 채권의 집행을 보전할 목적으로 잠정적으로 채무자의 재산을 책임재산으로 확보하는 보전처분이다. 따라서 가압류가 집행되면 가압류 목적물에 대하여 채무자가 매매, 증여, 질권 등의 담보권 설정 등 일체의 처분을 금지하는 효력을 생기게 한다. 이를 처분금지적 효력이라고 부른다. 가압류의 처분금지효와 관련하여, 본건 대상 판례의 사실관계에서처럼 부동산에 대한 가압류등기가 있은 후 당해 부동산의 소유권이 이전되고 현 소유자의 채권자가 경매신청을 하여 매각된 경우 전 소유자에 대한 가압류권자가 배당에 참가할 수 있는지, 배당에 참가한다면 배당을 받아 가압류등기가 말소되는지, 그렇지 않고 가압류 등기가 말소되지 않고 매수인(낙찰자)에게 그대로 인수되는지에 대해 학계와 실무계에서 적지 않은 논란이 있어 왔다. 대상판결은 이러한 논란에 대해 정면으로 결론을 제시한 최초의 판례로서 의미가 있다 할 것인바, 본 논문은 대상판결의 법적 쟁점 및 그에 대한 법리전개가 타당한지를 검토해 보고자 하였다. 첫 번째 쟁점인 ‘전 소유자에 대한 가압류권자는 현 소유자의 채권자에 의해 개시된 경매에서 배당을 받을 수 있고 배당을 받은 경우 가압류등기는 말소촉탁의 대상이 된다’는 점에 대하여는 법리적인 면에서나 구체적인 타당성의 면에서 지당하므로 이 판결을 지지한다. 두 번째 쟁점인 ‘제반 사정에 비추어 보면 집행법원은 이 사건 가압류등기를 그대로 존속시키면서 그 부담을 낙찰자가 인수하는 것을 전제로 경매절차를 진행한 것이라고 봄이 상당하여 그 가압류는 말소되지 않는다’는 점에 대하여는 그 결론에는 찬성하지만 그 결론에 이르는 논리적 전개 및 근거에 대해서는 견해를 다소 달리한다. 부동산 위의 부담인 전 소유자의 가압류 등기를 매각(낙찰)에 의해 소멸하게 할 것이냐 또는 인수하게 할 것이냐는 경매의 매각조건에 해당하고 가압류는 전 소유자의 가압류건 현 소유자의 가압류건 관계없이 가압류는 무조건 경매로 인해 소멸된다고 할 것이므로 이를 법정매각조건으로 볼 수 있다. 그리고 법정매각조건의 내용을 변경하였다면(말소에서 인수로) 이는 특별매각조건에 해당할 것이다. 따라서 관련 증거에 의해 전 소유자의 가압류가 인수되는 것을 특별매각조건으로 정하여 진행하였기 때문에 그 가압류가 인수된다고 판단하는 것이 법리적으로 훨씬 간명하고 논리적이라 할 것이다. 마지막으로 입법론적으로도, 경매절차는 이해관계인이 많고 일반 매매처럼 매매의 조건을 사적자치에 의해 정할 수 없기 때문에 매각조건을 명확히 할 필요가 있다. 따라서 매각조건은 법으로 정하고 있는데(매각조건 법정주의) 전 소유자에 대한 가압류의 경우에도 법 제91조의 말소되는 권리와 인수되는 권리의 내용 중에서 말소되는 권리로 명백히 규정하여 경매 이해관계인들이 확실히 예견하고 경매에 참여할 수 있도록 하는 입법론적 제안도 검토할 필요가 있을 것이다.

법학전문대학원에서의 “실습과정” 교육

최환주 전남대학교 법학연구소 2008 법학논총 Vol.28 No.2

This thesis is for practice course(externship) in the law school. The law school has been introduced to produce the expert lawyers equipped with the legal theory and practice who can provide various legal services, but it can not be asserted whether the practical course to produce such lawyers has been prepared in the law school and whether it can be well operated. However, we have as far prepared much, and if we prepare the more in future, it will be satisfactorily possible. Therefore, in order to make the more fruitful practical course in the law school in future, the contents proposed by this researcher are arranged and presented as follows, even if it not sufficient. Firstly, the legal clinic in the law school, which is the core in the practical course, shall be surely introduced. Secondly, for the practical course with substantiality, strict management of the academic advisor, win-win strategy between graduate student and practice organization, prohibition from disclosure of the test marks and the grade of the lawyer to complete the practical course faithfully and etc. are presented. Thirdly, the practical course to provide various legal services shall be prepared, and for this, the organization objective for practice shall be expanded. Fourthly, the employment shall be expanded through the linkage between the practical course and the future course. Fifthly, just after passing the lawyer test, there shall be mutual supplementation between training in Korean Bar Association and its practical course. Furthermore, the more research and endeavor for the fruitful practical course shall be doubled. This thesis is for practice course(externship) in the law school. The law school has been introduced to produce the expert lawyers equipped with the legal theory and practice who can provide various legal services, but it can not be asserted whether the practical course to produce such lawyers has been prepared in the law school and whether it can be well operated. However, we have as far prepared much, and if we prepare the more in future, it will be satisfactorily possible. Therefore, in order to make the more fruitful practical course in the law school in future, the contents proposed by this researcher are arranged and presented as follows, even if it not sufficient. Firstly, the legal clinic in the law school, which is the core in the practical course, shall be surely introduced. Secondly, for the practical course with substantiality, strict management of the academic advisor, win-win strategy between graduate student and practice organization, prohibition from disclosure of the test marks and the grade of the lawyer to complete the practical course faithfully and etc. are presented. Thirdly, the practical course to provide various legal services shall be prepared, and for this, the organization objective for practice shall be expanded. Fourthly, the employment shall be expanded through the linkage between the practical course and the future course. Fifthly, just after passing the lawyer test, there shall be mutual supplementation between training in Korean Bar Association and its practical course. Furthermore, the more research and endeavor for the fruitful practical course shall be doubled.

지방자치단체 산하기관의 통합 보안관리 제안에 관한 연구

최환주,박용석 한국융합보안학회 2021 융합보안 논문지 Vol.21 No.4

지방자치단체 대부분의 산하기관은 정보보안 전담 조직은 물론이고 전담 인력의 부재와 기관의 관심 부족으로 인해 상시로 사이버 위협에 노출되어있다. 지자체 산하기관은 지자체가 출자·출연한 기관으로서 관리·감독의 법적 책임이 있다. 따라서 이 연구에서는 지자체를 중심으로 산하기관의 네트워크를 연결하여 지자체의 네트워크, 정보보안 인프라 및 보안관제 인프라를 사용하여 지자체 산하기관에서 보유하고 있는 중요정보(개인정보 등)를 보호하기 위한 지자체 산하기관의 보안관리 체계 개선에 관해 연구할 계기가 되었다. 장기적으로 산하기관에서 운영 중인 대국민시스템 및 ERP, 그룹웨어 등 개인정보 처리 시스템의 안정적 서비스를 위한 클라우드 시스템(Cloud System)으로의 이전까지 제안하며, 산하기관의 보안성 제고 및 보안관리를 고민하는 지자체에 이 연구 결과가 도움이 되기를 바란다. Most of the Affiliated Organizations of the Local Governments are constantly exposed to cyber threats due to the lack of dedicated information security organizations, dedicated personnel and interest from institutions. As an institution invested and contributed by the Local Government, it has the legal responsibility of management and supervision. Therefore, in this study, the network of the Local Government is connected by using the network of the Local Government, information security infrastructure, and security control infrastructure. It was an opportunity to conduct research on the improvement of the security control system of the Local Government to protect important information (personal information, etc.) owned by the Local Government. In the long term, we propose a transfer to the cloud system for stable services of personal information processing systems such as public systems, ERPs, and groupwares operated by Affiliated Organizations, and consider enhancing the security of Affiliated Organizations and security control. It is hoped that the results of this study will be helpful to the Local Governments.