부동산 유치권의 개선방안 - 2011년 민법개정시안을 중심으로 - = Alternatives to the Right of Retention of Immovable Property - Discussions on the 2011 Draft of the Civil Code Revision -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Whether or not to abolish the right of retention of immovable, thereby confining its use to movables, has become a major legislative agendum in the latest scene of civil code revision efforts. While a growing number of academics generally believe that the nation's legal system should be better off without it, finding the single best alternative is proving a daunting task since it can be possibly replaced by any number of new instruments.
The current Civil Code of Korea stipulates that three types of real rights may be created for the purpose of furnishing security: right of retention, pledge, and mortgage. As for the right of retention, immovables as well as movables can be the object since Article 320 simply provides for that this specific form of right may be established on “another person's property." Allowing right of retention on immovables while setting possession as the method of publication, however, does not accord with the general publication method of other immovable property rights, namely registration.
It is in this context that the Fifth Subcommittee of the Civil Code Amendment Committee has come up with a new draft on right of retention that will basically replace it with the right to demand creation of mortgage on immovable property. Introducing this alternative will relieve the incongruity of recognizing a property right that does not appear on the real estate registry. Moreover, those who have paid for expenses on immovable properties (or those entitled to create a right of retention on immovables for any other reasons) may take advantage of this new system to more evidently publish their right by declaring their mortgage right on the registry. It is expected that this will ultimately put an end to the numerous disputes arising out of retention rights established on immovables, and there will be fewer unregistered property rights, which in turn will allow the real estate registry to function as a stronger means of publication.
In order for civil code revision efforts to bear fruit, it should be demonstrated that this can actually be a reasonable solution to the many legal problems that we witness every day. I hope that the new draft on right of retention, with further discussions and deliberations, will do its part for resolving such problems.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 梁彰洙, "留置權의 發生要件으로서의 ｢債權과 物件 간의 牽連關係" 박영사 1 : 1991

2 嚴東燮, "留置權의 成立要件: 牽連性" (585) : 2005

3 申菊美, "留置權制度에 관한 硏究" 고려대학교 2003

4 金基燦, "不動産競賣에서 留置權의 改善에 관한 硏究" 건국대학교 2008

5 서기석, "유치권자의 경락인에 대한 피담보채권의 변제청구권의 유무" (26) : 1996

6 문광섭, "유치권의 피담보채권의 범위 : 채권과 물건 간의 견련관계 및 유치권의 불가분성과 관련하여" (71) : 2008

7 배용준, "유치권의 성립요건으로서의 견련관계 및 유치권의 불가분성" 민사판례연구회 (31) : 157-209, 2009

8 金永斗, "부동산유치권의 문제점에 관한 연구 In 土地法의 理論과 實務" 법원사 2006

9 吳始暎, "부동산 유치권의 한계와 입법적 검토 In 土地法의 理論과 實務" 법원사 2006

10 정준영, "부동산 유치권의 개선에 관한 연구" 법무부 2009

11 오시영, "부동산 유치권 강제집행에 대한 문제점과 입법론적 고찰" 한국토지법학회 23 (23): 213-254, 2007

12 이동진, "물권적 유치권의 정당성과 그 한계" 한국민사법학회 49 (49): 49-88, 2010

13 김재형, "담보법의 현재와 미래 - 민법 시행 50주년을 맞이하여 -" 한국민사법학회 52 : 329-359, 2010

14 權龍雨, "物的 擔保制度의 課題와 展望 In 現代法學의 課題와 展望" 신양사 1998

15 郭潤直, "物權法, 제7판" 박영사 2002

16 李英俊, "物權法, 전정신판" 박영사 2009

17 郭潤直, "民法注解(ⅩⅤ)" 박영사 1997

18 法務部, "民法(財産編) 改正 資料集" 2004

19 李時潤, "新民事執行法, 제5판" 박영사 2009

20 金相容, "擔保物權制度의 課題" (9) : 1993

21 郭潤直, "債權各論, 제6판" 박영사 2003

22 추신영, "假裝留置權의 進入制限을 위한 立法的 考察" 한국민사법학회 (44) : 351-383, 2009

23 Busche, "Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch Bd. 4, 5. Aufl" 2009