民事立證責任理論에 關한 硏究 :

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Since virtually impossible to establish the whole sphere of verification liability theory, it seems that research and review concentrated on a certain part would be desirable, but it also requires to study other remaining parts inevitably and moreover, cannot neglect such parts which would require profound researches rather than the aimed part. In this consideration, made researches in the whole sphere of verification liability theory as follows:
1. Established value, purpose and sphere of research to study verification liability theory.
2. To investigate significance of verification liability theory, established development background and concept of verification liability theory around its history and trend, and studied by inserting subject of justice, in addition to fairness in majority view and consideration of policy.
3. Investigated sphere and legal nature of verification liability, and prior to acertain application range, studied function as a role of verification liability, on which basis considered concrete application range of verification liability by kinds of lawsuit a.nd by facts of verification required, and checked possibility and necessity of verification liability for the important fact and existence-nonexistence of law under the code of legal procedure to study a basic theory of verification liability.
4. Time preceding is required, prior to approach a concrete subject, for the development of verification liability, and investigated necessity of claim liability, as coexisting but at the same time different concepts, and explanatory obligation in the meaning of holding relevant party without having verification liability generally responsible for it, also relations between these concepts.
5. Investigated views that verification liability developed and claimed about above distribution since old times, and on the basis of views pursuant to recent trend, investigated the principle of verification liability distribution through amendment theory of law condition assortment as a common view and reconstructed distribution theory.
6. As regards the extent of verification act of the party liable for verification by above distribution, reviewed comparing our country with foreign countries e.g. U.K., U.S.A., Japan and Germany etc., and studied by each fact of verification required.
7. In connection with above principle of distribution, studied, by dividing into mitigation of verification liability and conversion problem, concerning mitigation of verification liability being normalized by precedent cases and theory in so-called special lawsuit of modern type in which case verification liability by distribution according to principle would be mostly improper due to general problems of society getting complicated and various.
In conclusion, in reference to concept, ideology, application range, relation with other concepts, desirable principle of distribution, extent of verification, and mitigation and conversion of verification liability etc., reviewed verification liability theory comparing it with precedent cases, and presented view of possibility of legalization.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차
• 第I章 序論 = 1
• 第1節. 硏究의 目的 = 1
• 第2節. 硏究 範圍와 方法 = 3
• 1. 硏究의 範圍 = 3
• 2. 硏究의 方法 = 5
• 第II章 立證責任理論의 一般 = 6
• 第1節. 序說 = 6
• 第2節. 立證責任의 意義 = 7
• 1. 沿革 = 8
• 2. 客觀的 立證責任 = 10
• 3. 主觀的 立證責任 = 12
• 4. 客觀的 立證責任과 主觀的 立證責任의 關係 = 13
• 第3節. 立證責任의 理念 = 15
• 1. 公平 = 15
• 2. 正義 = 16
• 3. 政策的 考慮 = 17
• 第4節. 立證責任의 性質 = 18
• 1. 立證責任의 法域 = 18
• 2. 立證責任의 法的性質 = 20
• 第5節. 立證責任의 機能 = 22
• 1. 客觀的 立證責任의 機能(本來的 機能) = 22
• 2. 主觀的 立證責任의 機能(附隨的 機能) = 23
• 第6節. 立證責任의 適用範圍 = 24
• 1. 訴訟種類에 따른 範圍 = 24
• 2. 要證事實에 따른 範圍 = 25
• 가. 主要事實 = 26
• 나. 先決關係의 要件事實 = 27
• 다. 訴訟法上 要件事實과 法規存否에 대한 適用 = 29
• 第7節. 立證責任과 關聯된 主要槪念 = 31
• 1. 主張責任 = 33
• 가. 槪念 = 33
• 나. 主張責任의 區分 = 35
• 다. 立證責任과의 關係 = 36
• 2. 解明義務 = 38
• 가. 槪念 = 38
• 나. 解明義務의 必要性 = 39
• 다. 主張 立證責任과의 關係와 效果 = 40
• 第III章 立證責任의 分配와 立證程度 = 43
• 第1節. 序說 = 43
• 1. 分配의 意義 = 43
• 2. 立證程度의 意義 = 44
• 第2節. 立證責任分配의 諸原則 = 47
• 1. 完全性 理論 = 47
• 2. 法規分類說 = 47
• 3. 要證事實分類說 = 48
• 4. 法律要件 分類說(規範說) = 50
• 가. 因果關係說 = 52
• 나. 通常事實說 = 53
• 다. 最小限 事實說 = 54
• 라. 特別要件說 = 55
• 마. 全部事實說 = 57
• 바. 利益說 = 57
• 사. 根據要件說 = 57
• 第3節. 最近 動向에 의한 分配原則의 再構成 = 58
• 1. 最近의 動向 = 58
• 2. 法律要件說의 修正論 = 60
• 가. 危險 領域說 = 60
• 나. 要件事實論 = 62
• 다. 其他 修正說 = 64
• 3. 立證責任 分配 理論의 再構成 = 66
• 가. 利益衡量說 = 66
• 나. 蓋然性說 = 71
• 다. 行爲責任說 = 72
• 第4節. 立證程度에 있어서의 論爭 = 74
• 1. 確信의 主體 = 74
• 2. 確信의 內容 = 76
• 3. 立證의 程度에 관한 計量 = 78
• 4. 國家別 立證의 程度에 관한 見解 = 80
• 가. 英美法係 = 80
• 나. 獨逸 = 81
• 다. 日本 = 82
• 라. 우리나라 = 83
• 第5節. 要證事實別 立證의 程度 差異 = 86
• 1. 主要事實의 立證程度 = 88
• 2. 間接事實의 立證程度 = 89
• 3. 補助事實의 立證程度 = 91
• 第IV章 立證責任의 緩和와 轉換 = 93
• 第1節. 序說 = 93
• 1. 意義 = 93
• 2. 立證責任 轉換의 存否에 관한 意見對立 = 96
• 第2節. 推定 = 100
• 1. 槪念 = 100
• 2. 事實上의 推定 = 101
• 3. 法律上의 推定 = 105
• 4. 意思的 推定 = 108
• 第3節. 表見立證 = 110
• 1. 槪念 = 110
• 2. 法的性質 = 113
• 가. 立證責任說 = 113
• 나. 自由心證說 = 113
• 다. 立證程度說 = 115
• 라. 實體法說 = 115
• 3. 適用 範圍 = 116
• 4. 表見立證의 飜覆 = 119
• 第4節. 間接反證 = 119
• 1. 槪念 = 119
• 2. 間接反證의 機能 = 121
• 3. 間接反證의 要件 = 122
• 4. 間接反證에 관한 意見對立 = 124
• 5. 間接反證과 表見立證과의 關係 = 126
• 제5節. 立證妨害 = 129
• 1. 槪念 = 129
• 2. 立證妨害 制裁의 根據 = 130
• 가. 經驗則說 = 130
• 나. 信義則 違反說 = 131
• 다. 協力義務 違反說 = 133
• 라. 期待可能性說 = 133
• 마. 危險領域說 = 134
• 바. 衡平說 = 135
• 사. 損害賠償義務說 = 135
• 3. 立證妨害의 範圍와 要件 = 136
• 4. 立證妨害의 效果 = 138
• 가. 立證責任 轉換說 = 138
• 나. 自由心證說 = 139
• 다. 自由裁量說 = 141
• 第6節. 立證責任 契約과 釋明權에 의한 轉換 = 142
• 1. 契約에 의한 立證責任의 轉換 = 142
• 2. 釋明權에 의한 立證策任의 轉換 = 144
• 第V章 結論 = 147
• 參考文獻
• ABSTRACT