傳貰權과 典權과의 比較硏究

윤대성(Yoon Dae-Sung) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2007 성균관법학 Vol.19 No.1

  Previous researches on the Jeonse-right (傳貰權) in the Korean Civil Code have been mainly focused on comparison with the Tien-right (典權) in the Civil Code of the Republic of China (Taiwan, the Nationalist Government), which was referred to in the process of legislation. Recently, however. as the Law of Reality is established in the Civil Code of the Peoples Republic of China, the legislation of the Tien-right is being discussed frequently and the bill has been presented. With the new legislation of the Tien-right in China. it becomes possible to cope with new legal systems based on the legal principles of the use of real properties (usufruit) as securities in Korea and China by comparing the Chinese Tien-right with the Korean Jeonse-right.<BR>  The present study compared the history and legal structure of the Jeonse-right and the Tien-right, and drew conclusions as follows:<BR>  First, it was found that the Jeonse-right in the Korean Civil Code and the Tien-right in the Law of Reality (bill) of the Peoples Republic of China came from the same origin historically. However, through the social and economic development, the Jeonse-right and the Tien-right have been practiced differently. That is, both of the two contain the aspect of use and benefit but. different from the Jeonse-right. the Tien-right has ended up as the reversion of the ownership.<BR>  Second. different from the Tien-right in the Law of Reality of the Peoples Republic of China, the Jeonse-right in the Korean Civil Code had been a common practice and was established as a system under the statute law. However, the Tien-right in the Law of Reality of the Peoples Republic of China had been proposed to be legislated as a real right but. after all, was decided to be left to the common law and to be removed from legislation.<BR>  Third, the Jeonse-right in the Korean Civil Code and the Tien-right in the Law of Reality (bill) of the Peoples Republic of China have been discussed in legal theories on legal structure and precedents but the discussions were limited to the aspect of use and benefit. To solve this problem fundamentally. both considered it the most desirable legislative attitude to view the rights as real rights granted by way of security through the revenue from the use of the object (antichr?se).<BR>  Therefore. it is thought necessary to revise provisions on the Jeonse-right in the Korean Civil Code so that the Jeonse-right plays its social function as a practical system. This is also the case in legislation for the Tien-right in the Law of Reality of the Peoples Republic of China.<BR>  Accordingly, if this problem is resolved legislatively, the Jeonse system under the Korean Civil Law is legally unified and the restriction on the application scope of building (houses and commercial buildings) Jeonse-rights by the Special Act on Civil Affairs is lifted, furthermore. the inadequacy of hypothec (mortgage). which has only the auction right, is expected to made up for by the function to use and take the fruits of the object by revenue execution (compulsory administration) under Article 163 of the Civil Execution Act in the real estate execution procedure.

충수돌기 장중첩증의 증례보고

윤대성(Dae Sung Yoon),김주섭(Joo Seop Kim),배수동(Soo Tong Pai) 대한외과학회 1992 Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research Vol.42 No.6

大韓帝國의 光武量案에 의한 近代的 所有權의 確立

尹大成(Yoon, Dae-Sung) 한국법사학회 2001 法史學硏究 Vol.24 No.-

항문거근 상방을 침범한 치루의 대둔근 충전술

윤대성(Dae-Sung Yoon),박철재(Chul-Jae Park),배수동(Soo-Tong Pai) 대한외과학회 1991 Annals of Surgical Treatment and Research Vol.40 No.3

土地와 그 定着物의 關係 - 土地와 建物이 별개의 不動産으로 된 沿革을 중심으로 -

윤대성(Yoon Dae-Sung) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2004 성균관법학 Vol.16 No.2

According to Article 99 [Real Estate Provisions], Korean Civil Code, lands and their fixtures are regulated as real estate. Though fixtures on lands should belong to those lands, however. It has no provision about the relationship of lands and their fixtures. Until now, there have been various doubts on traditional theories and judicial precedents which interpret buildings etc. as real estate separated from the lands it belongs to. Therefore, the purpose of this research is to reveal the relationship of lands and their fixtures. The content of this research is to search methods to settle current contradictions, by analyzing the legislation processes of Article 99, Korean Civil Code, and foreign legislation cases, and by critical researches on the traditional interpretations regarding Article 99, Korean Civil Code. The composition of this research is, 1. Preface, 2. The legislation processes of Article 99, Korean Civil Code, and foreign legislation cases, 3. The relationship of lands and their fixtures, 4. Conclusion. In particular, in Section 2, the reasons for lands and their fixtures not being treated integrally will be studied by analyzing and reviewing legislation intentions in the legislation processes of Article 99, Korean Civil Code, and, in the legislation processes and interpretations of, among foreign legislation precedents, Article 86, Japanese Civil Code, and Article 96, Manchurian Civil Code, which had been referred to in the legislation of Korean Civil Code. In Section 3, issues regarding the fact that lands and their fixtures are separately treated will be analyzed and reviewed to show merits and demerits of this separation. As a conclusion, if mterpretations on Clause 1, Article 99, Korean Civil Code, can't be clearly defined after analyzing and reviewing the legislation processes and its intentions in Article 99, Korean Civil Code, lands and their fixtures had better be integrally treated by interpreting fixtures on lands as the components of those lands such as in the legislation cases of the West

일제지배기의 유산상속에 관한 관습법

윤대성 ( Yoon Dae-sung ) 한국지역발전학회 2016 지역발전연구 Vol.14 No.1

이 논문은 일제의 한국관습법조사사업에 의하여 『관습조사보고서』에 조사 보고된 유산상속에 관한 관습법이 『조선왕조실록』, 『승정원일기』에서의 유산상속에 관한 법제와 어떻게 다른가를 밝힌다. 그리고 조선고등법원 판결에 의하여 유산상속에 관한 관습법이 어떻게 변용되었는가를 일제에 의한 『관습조사보고서』를 중심으로 『조선왕조실록』, 『승정원일기』에서의 유산상속에 관한 법제와 비교하여 분석 검토하고자 한다. 이를 바탕으로 현행민법전에서의 재산상속법에 관하여 전망하고자 한다. This article reveals how the customary law on inheritance reported and investigated in the "Customs Survey Report” by the Japanese Common Law Investigation Project differs from the legal system of inheritance in "Chosun Dynasty Annals” and "Seungjongwon Diary.” In addition, it examines how the customary law of inheritance was changed by the decision of the Supreme Court of Chosun by comparing it with the legal system of the heritage inheritance in the "Chosun Dynasty Annals” and "Seungjongwon Diary” I want to. Based on these, I would like to view the property inheritance law in current Korean Civil Code.

企業倒産과 賃金債權의 保護 : 倒産節次에서 賃金債權의 辨濟順位를 중심으로

윤대성(Yoon, Dae-Sung) 성균관대학교 비교법연구소 2008 성균관법학 Vol.20 No.3

In order to consider how workers’ wage claims are protected when a company goes bankrupt, the present study analyzed the order of priority of claim for the payment of wages in the bankrupt procedure under the Consolidated Insolvency Act(Act on Rehabilitation and Bankrupt of Debtors) based on the peculiarity of wage claims. According to the results of this study, the current law has structural limitations in achieving the objectives of bankrupt procedure and protecting workers’ wage claims at the same time. Accordingly, with regard to the order of priority of claim for the payment of wages including workers’ wages, it is necessary to establish a law integrating the Labor Standards Act as a substantive law and the Consolidated Insolvency Act as a procedural law. In the legislation, however, adjustments should be made so that the original function of bankrupt procedure may not be disrupted by workers’ wage claims with the right to obtain preferential satisfaction, which may cause the shortage of bankrupt estate to be allotted to general creditors in the bankrupt procedure. First, improvement should be made to resolve conflicts among Article 473-2 “Claims for Taxes, etc.” of the Consolidated Insolvency Act, Article 473-10 “Claims for Payment of Wages” of the same law, and Article 38- 2 of the Labor Standards Act. Second, improvement should be made in relevant laws and regulations through close examination of issues such as: “Whether, in case bankrupt estate is not sufficient, persons possessing the right of separation(Article 411 of he Consolidated Insolvency Act) can be excluded by asserting the right to obtain most preferential satisfaction for wage claims based on the legislation purpose of Article 38-2 ‘Wage Claims with Right to Obtain Most Preferential Satisfaction’ of the Labor Standards Act”; and “How priority among foundation credits should be decided in case bankrupt estate is not sufficient for paying the whole amount of foundation credits.”

암 진단을 위한 마이크로/나노진단기기 개발

윤대성 ( Dae Sung Yoon ),강지윤 ( Ji Yoon Kang ),김태송 ( Tae Song Kim ) 대한소화기학회 2007 대한소화기학회지 Vol.49 No.5

In order to rapidly detect and analyze the presence of a target ligand of interests in environmental or industrial fluids as well as biological samples, numerous test systems have been designed and developed, which have been based on the combination of a test reagent and absorbing paper or membrane. The main limitations of these conventional devices are the difficulty of quantitative or semi-quantitative detection and poor detection limit (around nanogram/ml range detection capability). In this paper, new approaches and research trends which use nano/MEMS (micro electro mechanical systems) technology is introduced, which has a concept of fast, precise, and massive diagnosis and analysis of target molecules using very small amount of samples. (Korean J Gastroenterol 2007;49:280-286)

未登記傳貰와 破産關係

尹大成(Yoon Dae-Sung) 한국법학원 2001 저스티스 Vol.34 No.4

韓國民法典의 現代語化

윤대성(Yoon, Dae-Sung) 조선대학교 법학연구원 2010 法學論叢 Vol.17 No.2

현재 우리나라 민법전(재산편) 개정작업이 진행되고 있다. 그 개정작업에서 민법전의 현대어화를 어떻게 할 것인가에 대하여 선행연구를 분석하고 평소에 가졌던 생각을 제시하고자 한다. 무엇보다 우리의 현행 민법전의 현대어화를 하는 것이 긴요하다. 현행 민법전은 일본 명치민법을 번역 개정한 것으로써 1950년대에 우리가 사용한 언어와 일본어식 한자어를 그대로 법전용어로 한 것이다. 따라서 오늘날 우리가 사용하지 않는 언어뿐만 아니라 일본어식 한자어 내지 문장에 의한 일본어식 표기의 법률용어는 민법전을 생활 속에서 사용하는 현대인에게 시대착오적인 것임을 지적하지 않을 수 없다. 이미 일본에서 그 점을 인식하여 우리 현행 민법전의 모본이었던 명치민법전의 현대어화 작업을 한 점을 우리는 도외시 할 수 없다. 민법전의 개정은 어려운 것이고 힘이 드는 일이지만, 그 개정작업에 있어서 민법전의 현대어화를 어떻게 할 것인가를 먼저 해결하는 것이 필요하다. The Korean Civil Code (the Properties Part) is currently under revision. With regard to the use of contemporary language in the revised Civil Code, this study analyzed previous studies and suggested the author’s ideas on this matter. First of all, it is keenly required to revise the current Korean Civil Code using contemporary language. The current Korean Civil Code was translated from the Japanese Meiji Civil Code and had been revised. Our language and Japanese style Chinese words in the 1950s were used as legal terms. Accordingly, its language is far different from our contemporary one, and legal terms originating from Japanese style Chinese words or Japanesestyle expressions are anachronistic for contemporary people who use the Civil Code in their everyday life. Recognizing this, Japan has already introduced contemporary language to its Meiji Civil Code, which is the prototype of our current Civil Code. In this situation, we cannot overlook the problem in our Civil Code. It is quite difficult and laborious to revise the Civil Code, but in the revision work, it should be solved first how to translate the Korean Civil Code into contemporary language.