http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
조성을(Cho, Sung_Eul) 연세대학교 강진다산실학연구원 2014 다산과현대 Vol.7 No.-
Between Korean NeoConfucianism and Korean NeoNeoConfucianism is the Continuity and Discontinuity. These two thoughts were composed with three respects, namely Philological Research on Confucian Classics, Philosophy and Social Thought. At first the differences between two thoughts were not big but gradually the gaps were enlarged and in the end the thoughts became completely different in the abovementioned three respects. First, in the respect of Philological Research on Confucian Classics, on the one hand Korean Neo-Neo-Confucianism, partially influenced by Korean Neo-Confucianism, formed its own interpretation systems in the end. Secondly, in the respect of Philosophy Korean Neo-Neo-Confucianism became completely different from that of Korean Neo-Confucianism in the fact that the former is dualism but the latter is monism. Thirdly, in the respect of Social thought Korean Neo-Confucian Social thought was based on the landownership and status system. However Korean Neo-Neo-Confucianism wanted the lift of status system and landownership. Thus in character the latter tried to maintain Korean Medieval Society but the former wished to build up the new equal world, even though the new one is different from modern western one.
서을오 梨花女子大學校 法學硏究所 2016 法學論集 Vol.21 No.2
통설에 따르면, 금전은 동산이기는 하지만 물건이라기보다는 가치의 표상이므로, 금전을 점유한 자는 곧바로 소유권을 취득하게 된다. 따라서 금전의 반환 문제도 항상 부당이득 반환청구에 의할 것이지, 소유물 반환청구는 적용되지 않는다. 이러한 우리 학계의 통설은 일본의 통설인 스에카와·가와시마(末川・川島)의 학설을 받아들인 것이고, 이것은 다시 독일의 막스 카저(Max Kaser)의 학설을 수입한 것이었다. 이 논문의 목적은 카저의 견해를 선의취득의 학설사의 관점에서 평가하고, 그의 견해가 1930년대 이후 독일에서 퇴출된 이유를 해명하는 것이다. 로마법은 사용취득이든 장기간의 취득시효에 있어서든, 금전의 시효취득을 특별히 우대하지 않았고 금전을 다른 동산과 똑같이 취급했다. 금전의 혼화와 소비에 있어서는 원소유자의 소유물 반환청구가 부인되고 부당이득 반환청구만이 인정되었지만, 이것은 카저의 견해처럼 금전의 점유자가 곧바로 그 소유권을 취득해서가 아니라, 그 물건 자체가 더 이상 존재하지 않는 것으로 파악됨으로써 소유물 반환청구의 요건이 갖추어지지 않았기 때문이었다. 선의취득 제도의 역사적 발전을 살펴보면 그 어떤 경우에도 카저의 견해와 같이 취득자의 선의 여부 등을 고려하지도 않고 금전의 점유만 취득하면 즉시 소유권 취득을 인정하는 예는 없었다. 또한 금전의 유통성을 특히 보호하는 근대의 입법들의 경우에도, 금전의 경우에는 그것이 도품・유실물인 경우에도 선의취득을 인정한다는 내용일 뿐, 카저의 견해처럼 금전의 경우에는 아예 선의취득이 문제되지 않는다는 입장을 취한 예는 결코 없었다. 본고장인 독일과 유럽에서는 퇴출된 카저의 견해가 오로지 일본과 한국에서만 통설의 지위를 누려온 것은 그것이 입법의 불비를 해결하는 간편한 방법이었기 때문이다. 그러나 이것은 어떤 학설이 등장하게 된 역사적 맥락에 대한 충분한 고려 없이, 그 결론만을 가져다 쓰는 태도에 따르는 위험성을 보여주는 좋은 예이다. It is commonly accepted that the possession of money is equal to it's ownership because the money is not a kind of goods, but a symbol for value. This opinion is derived from Japanese common opinion and from the view of Max Kaser. This paper aims to evaluate the validity of Kaser's view in view of dogmatic history of bona fide possession. The Roman law established the principle of absolute ownership. Therefore it had to cope with the needs of commercial security by usucapio and longi temporis praescriptio. The Romans treated the money specially in many aspects. But they did not regard it exclusively as a symbol of value. The german principle of "Hand wahre Hand" made some contributions to developments of bona fide possession. Nevertheless it's history shows no sign of regarding money solely as value symbol. The European codifications since 18th century also indicate the same result that the Roman tradition about money has not changed in it's essence. Max Kaser invented his view in the era of German Nazzis. However his view was totally rejected by most of German scholars because his view was too extreme. Only the Japanese and Korean scholars fully accepted his theory about money, which can only be explained as an example of inadequate acceptance of foreign theory neglecting its historical backgrounds.
서을오 梨花女子大學校 法學硏究所 2018 法學論集 Vol.22 No.4
It is commonly accepted that the possession of money is equal to it's ownership because the money is not a kind of goods, but a symbol for value. It is commonly held that “the care by the good manager” is defined as “the general principle of the duty of care in the civil law” to “the degree of care required for the average person in trades”. In the end, the duty of care is one of the important examples of the modern principle of fault responsibility. It is also generally accepted that the duty of care in the current law goes through the Japanese Civil Law and the French Civil Law and ultimately to the duty of care by “diligens et bonus pater familias” of the Roman law. The goal of this article is to show in what way and in what ways the “good manager” in our civil law is different from the “bonus pater familias” in Roman law. In order to do so, this article first examines the historical process in which not the notion of bonus pater familias, but the concept of culpa and dolus, is formed in the Roman law. Then, we look at specific cases of the duty of care in the Roman law according to individual contract types. In conclusion, the duty of care in the present law obviously derives from the Roman term “the duty of a good paterfamilias”. However there is a big difference in the meaning of both. The term “the duty of a good paterfamilias” is only one of the terms used and developed by the Roman lawyers in relation to the relationship of culpa and dolus. The former term itself never expresses the whole of Rome's legal reasoning. The identification of the two is perhaps a result of uncritically projecting the conceptual legal thought of the current law into the Roman law. 통설은 ‘선량한 관리자의 주의’를 “거래상 일반적으로 평균인에게 요구되는 정도의 주의”로, 즉 민법상의 주의의무의 일반적인 원칙을 규정한 것으로 이해한다. 결국 선관주의 의무는 근대적 과실책임의 원칙이 표현된 중요한 예의 하나라고 볼 수 있다. 그런데 현행법의 선관주의 의무가 일본 민법과 프랑스 민법을 거쳐서, 결국 로마법상의 ‘주의 깊고 선량한 가장(diligens et bonus pater familias)이 기울이는 주의’에 기원한다는 것은 일반적으로 인정되고 있다. 이 글의 목표는 우리 민법상의 ‘선량한 관리자’가 로마법상의 ‘선량한 가장’과 어떤 면에서 동일하고 어떤 면에서 차이가 있는지를 보여주는 것이다. 그러기 위해서 이 글은, 로마법상의 ‘선량한 가장의 주의’라는 개념 그 자체가 아니라, 그것을 포함하고 있는 보다 상위 개념인 유책사유(culpa, dolus)가 로마법 속에서 형성되는 역사적 과정을 먼저 살펴본다. 이어서, 로마법상의 유책사유가 개별 계약 유형에 있어서 구체적으로 어떤 모습으로 나타났는지를 살펴본다. 결론적으로, 현행법의 선관주의의무는 분명히 로마법의 ‘선량한 가장의 주의의무’라는 용어로부터 유래한다고 할 수 있겠지만, 양자의 의미에는 큰 차이가 있다. ‘ 선량한 가장의 주의의무’는 로마 법률가들이 유책사유와 관련하여 사용하고 발전시킨 용어들 중의 하나일뿐이지, 결코 그것은 로마법에서 형성된 유책사유 법리의 전체를 표현하지 못한다. 양자를 동일시하는 것은, 현행법학의 개념법학적 사고를 로마법에 무비판적으로 투영한 결과가 아닌가 한다.
서을오 이화여자대학교 2004 法學論集 Vol.8 No.2
One may ask why we must still study the ancient roman law in the 21st century. This article tries to give an answer to the question by showing some astonishing aspects of the roman law. First of all the Romans did not like codifications and maintained this conservative attitude. They preferred a gradual development through juristic discussion. Secondly the Romans distinguished the law very strictly from all that ist not law Within the realm of the law the work of subdivision and isolation was continued. The most significant separation was the severance of public law(ius publicum) from private law(ius privatum). Therefore the classical jurisprudence consisted mainly in the science of private law the science relating to the private law of the City of Rome and private Italic law. Thirdly. the Romans avoided abstract formulation and juristic definitions The casuistic method of the roman jurists gave to classical literature a vivacity and freshness which could never have been attained by a strict theoretical system. Fourthly, an essential charateristic of Roman law was simplicity not multiplicity and love of variations. The language of classical jurisprudence was a special language, a scientific language which lays decisive on plainness, simplicity and clarity All these charateristic features of Roman law made it one of the most important phenomenon through history. As the great romanist Fritz Schulz wrote , "Roman law is the purest expression of the Roman nature and the most powerful witness to the greatness and glory of Rome"
金乙敎 명지대학교 예체능연구소 1997 藝體能論集 Vol.8 No.-
This study is to verify unique factors of physical fitness for adults who are over 30 years old. Gender and age differences were considered as an independent variable to influence subject's physical fitness factors such as, muscular strength, explosive power, agility, balance, and flexibility. Voluntary participation of 297 adult subjects in this study, included 167 males and 130 females. The subject's age range was from 30 to 68 years of age. Subjects' demographic variables such as sports experience, items of sport, and intensity of sports were not considered. Results of this study indicated as follows: 1. Regarding decreasing physical fitness levels Generally, it is clear that levels of every physical fitness items decrease with increasing age. Flexibility of 40 years old age subjects demonstrated a significant decrease rate compared with other age groups. Furthermore, 50 year old male subjects demonstrated significant decrease of physical fitness in such as explosive power, agility, balance, and static strength. With increasing age, the reaction time of female subjects increased more than that of the male subjects. Results indicated that agility of female subjects rapidly decreased more than that of the males. Furthermore, agility and flexibility of females tends to decrease rapidly from 60 years of age. Physical fitness factors such as static strength, explosive power, and agility performance of male subjects were greater than those of female subjects. Flexibility of female subjects was greater than that of male subjects. However, there are no significant differences in balance between male and female. 2. Regarding training methods by age. The best training methodology for maintaining health status is to prevent decreasing physical fitness levels by intensive physical training. Therefore, males who are from the ages of 30 to 40 require activities to promote balance ability. On the other hand, females who are in the same age range of male need to have exercises for flexibility. For the 40's male, exercises for flexibility were required, while females recommend exercises that include every factors of physical fitness. Because of significantly decrease of explosive power from age 50, multifactorial exercises that especially include activities to promote explosive power are required.
A Study on Biosynthesis of Vitellogenin Proteins of Drosophila grimshawi
서을원 安東大學 1987 安東大學 論文集 Vol.9 No.1
초파리의 지방체와 난소의 생체외 vitellogenin단백질합성능을 조사한 결과 난소는 자성지방체보다 훨씬 대사적으로 활성을 띠고 있으며, 합성된 대부분의 단백질은 난소조직내에 보지되고 있었다. 반면 지방체는 대부분의 단백질을 조직배양액내에 방출하는 경향을 보이고 있다. 이 두 조직에서 합성되어 조직배양액냉에 방출되는 주요 단백질은 난황단백질이었다. 3개의 단백질 (V_(1), V_(2), V_(3))의 합성은 이 두 조직에서 동시에 조절되지 않고 있다. 난소는 V_(2)단백질을 다량 합성하나 V_(1)과 V_(3)단백질은 매우 소량 합성하고 있다. 이에 반해 지방체는 V_(3)나 V_(3)단백질 보다는 훨씬 많은 V_(1)양의 단백질을 합성하고 있다. 여포세포도 난소의 vitellogenin합성부위로 확인되었다. 그러나 3개의 vitellogenin단백질의 합성은 동시적으로 조절되지 않고 있으며, 발생기에 따라 각 단백질의 합성이 조절되고 있다. 여포에 의해 생체외에 합성된 vitellogenin단백질은 조직배양액 내에 방출되나 난모세포내 축적되지 않고 있다. 결론적으로 생체 내에서 난소 vitellogenin은 interfollicular혹은 의 intraovariole공간 내에 분비되어 여기서 지방체에서 유래한 vitellogenin과 상호작용하여 난모세포속으로 축적되 가는 것으로 사료된다. 생체 외에서 이러한 축적이 억제되는 것은 적당한 호르몬이나 수용기 기능이 비정상적 조건에 있기 때문으로 생각된다. Present study is aimied to analyze the in vitro vitellogenin protein synthesis by the fat body and ovaries of Drosophila grimshawi as compared to the overall pattern of protein synthesis by these tissues. The ovaries are metabolically much more active than the female fat body, and that the majority of the synthesized proteins are retained by the ovarian tissues. By contrast the fat body secretes most of the proteins into the culture medium. Vitellogenins are the major class of proteins synthesized and secreted into the medium by both tissues. The synthesis of the three vitellogein proteins (V_(1), V_(2), V_(3)) is non-coordinate in the two tissues. Ovaries synthesize much more of the V_(2) protein, less V_(1) and very little V_(3) while fat body synthesizes more V(1) protein with lesser quantities of the other two. The follicle cells were identified as the site of ovarian vitellogenin synthesis in D.grimshawi. The three vitellogenins are synthesized in a non-coordinate and developmentally regulated manner by the follicle cells. The vitellogenins synthesized in vitro by the follicles are secreted into the medium and not incorporated into the oocyte. Conclusively, in vivo the ovarian vitellogenins are secreted into the interfollicular or intert body prior to uptake by the oocyte. In vitro this uptake is inhibited either because of the absence of the appropriate hormones or perhaps inappropriate conditions for normal receptor function.