瑕疵 있는 意思表示에 관한 判例分析

엄동섭 서강대학교 법학연구소 2002 서강법학 Vol.4 No.-

法律行爲의 解釋에 관한 判例分析

엄동섭 서강대학교 법학연구소 2003 서강법학 Vol.5 No.-

『신시론』 제1집과의 운명적 만남

엄동섭 근대서지학회 2014 근대서지 Vol.- No.10

사랑은 가고 옛날은 남는 것

엄동섭,장유정 근대서지학회 2011 근대서지 Vol.- No.3

虛僞表示(민법 제108조)에 관한 判例分析

嚴東燮 서강대학교 법학연구소 1999 서강법학 Vol.1 No.-

불법행위법의 개정

엄동섭 한국민사법학회 2012 民事法學 Vol.60 No.-

.From Mar. 2010 to Feb. 2112, the 6th Division of the Civil Law Reformation Committee of the Ministry of Justice prepared the draft for the amendment of tort law in Korea. The 6th Division composed the draft with reference to 2 previous drafts in Korea(1995, 2004), Principles of European Tort Law(PETL), Draft Common Frame of Reference(DCFR),the drafts of foreign countries(Swiss, France, Japan, China) and the Restatement of the Law of Torts. The summary of the draft is as follows. The amended parts are underlined. 1. Method of compensation: Compensation is to be awardee as a lump sum unless a good reason requires periodical payment. 2. Liability of parents for damage caused by children: Parents or other persons obliged by law to provide parental care for a person under eighteen years of age(=minor) are liable for the damage where that person under age caused the damage by conduct that would constitute intentional or negligent conduct, regardless of that person’s competency to understand the legal effect of his conduct. 3. Liability of employer for damage caused by employees: A person who employs or similarly engages another is liable for damage suffered by a third person, when the person employed or engaged caused the damage in the course of the employment or engagement, even if the employer exercised his care to prevent the damage. 4. Liability for damage caused by the unsafe state of an immovable: A person who independently exercises control over an immovable(=the possessor of an immovable) is liable for damage suffered by a third person, when the damage was caused by the unsafe state of immovable. In addition to the possessor, the owner who does not posses the immovable is also liable for that damage. The possessor and the owner are liable for that damage jointly and severally. In this context, however, the immovable does not include a land. 5. Liability of joint tort-feasors: Joint tort-feasors are liable jointly and severally for damage suffered by third party. There are two kinds of joint tort-feasor: joint tort feasor with same intention and joint tort-feasor for same damage. A jont tort-feasor who compensate damage has right to demand a reimbursement from another joint tort-feasor according to their portion to the joint tort. 6. Defenses: In addition to Self-defense and Necessity, Self-help and Consent are newly recognized as a defense. And with regard to defamation, a person has a defense if he defamed someone in necessary protection of public interest. 7. Injunction(Right to prevention): The right to prevention exists only in so far as compensation would not be an adequate alternative remedy and it is reasonable for the person who would be liable for the causation of the damage to prevent it from occurring.

퍼블리시티(Publicity)權

엄동섭 서강대학교 법학연구소 2004 서강법학 Vol.6 No.-

한국 민법상 비재산적 손해의 배상과 징벌적 손해배상

엄동섭 한국민사법학회 2015 民事法學 Vol.71 No.-

In diesem Artikel sind der Ersatz des immateriellen Schadens (= Schmerzengeld) und Punitive Damages im koreanischen Recht behandelt. Betreffs des Ersatzes des immateriellen Schadens, sind die Fuktionen dieses Ersatzes, d.h. die Ausgleichsfunktion, die funktion der Privatsstrafe, die Genugtuungsfunktion(= die Lehre von doppelte Funktionen), Präventivfunkion, Ergänzungsfunktion etc. in der Überlegung genommen und kritisiert. Darüber hinaus dieser Artikel behauptet daß zur angemessenen Anerkennung vom Ersatz des immateriellen Schadens, die Kategorisierung der unerlaubte Handlung nach dem anglo-amerikanischen Recht in diesem Gebiet erfordlich sei. Ferner die Einführung der anglo-amerikanischen Insitution von Punitve Damges in das koreanische Rechtssystem war zu der letzten Zeit herkömmlich verneint. Jedoch ist die ähnliche Institution, d.h. Multiple Damages und Statutory Damages bereits im koreanischen Rechtssystem annerkennt. Ich antizipiere daß in absehbarer Zeit wird die Institution von Punitve Damges in das koreanische Rechtssystem eingeführt werden. In diesem Zusammenhang hebt diese Artikel die Erforschung der Maßregeln gegen den Nebenwirkung von Punitve Damges hervor.

민법개정, 무엇을 어떻게 할 것인가 ? - 최근의 외국의 사례를 참고하여

엄동섭 한국민사법학회 2018 民事法學 Vol.85 No.-

This year is the 60th anniversary of the ratification of the Korean Civil Code; 2020 will be the 60th anniversary of its enactment. The Korean Civil Code has maintained its original structure since it was first ratified because the amendments have been limited to sections relating to the Law of Property and Obligations (that is, excluding the Family Law section). In contrast, the German, French and Japanese Civil Codes, which have indirectly influenced our amendments of our Civil Code, have undergone major changes, especially in areas related to the Law of Claims. This paper intends to assess the amendment process of the German, French, and Japanese Civil Codes in order to answer the fundamental question of how to amend the broader aspects of the Korean Civil Code. This paper points out a number of broader issues related to the amendment that should be addressed, such as (a) whether to maintain the current Pandekten structure (b) whether to include special acts into the Civil Code (c) whether to formally stipulate the various principles and definitions involving the Civil Code (to make the Civil Code more accessible) and (d) the process of amending the Civil Code. With regards to the process and procedure of the amendment this paper emphasizes the need (a) enacting procedural rules within the amendment committee (b) raising public interest of the enactment by announcing, step-by-step, the process of the amendment and (c) the need for a government research arm that provides information about foreign law and its amendment. Moreover this paper stresses the importance of both scholars of the Civil Code and legislators to share the fundamental spirit behind revising the Civil Code: that is, to improve our Code (which historically have been criticized for having been modelled from other Civil Codes) with our own hands. Finally, this paper stipulates the remaining tasks related to amending the Torts and Statutory Claims based on the author’s experience as the Chairman of the sub-committee tasked to the amend the Torts section established by the Korean Ministry of Justice. 우리 민법은 올해로 제정된 지 60주년이며 2020년이면 시행 60주년을 맞이하게 된다. 그간 우리 민법은 가족법 분야를 제외하고 재산법 분야에서는 부분적인 개정만 이루어져 전체적으로는 원래의 모습을 그대로 유지하고 있다고 할 수 있다. 반면 과거 우리 민법의 제정에 직⋅간접적으로 많은 영향을 끼친 독일, 프랑스, 일본의 경우에는 최근 채권법 분야를 중심으로 전면적인 개정이 이루어졌다. 여기서 이 글은 이 세 나라의 민법(채권법) 개정의 과정을 살펴 봄으로써, 향후 우리 민법(재산법)의 전면적인 개정과 관련하여 개별적인 내용을 떠나, ‘무엇을 어떻게 할 것인가’라는 보다 근본적인 물음에 대한 해답을 도출해내고자 하였다. 그 결과 우선 개정의 대상과 관련하여 (1) 민법전의 체계(판덱텐 시스템의 유지 여부) (2) 특별법의 민법 편입 (3) 정의나 일반원칙 등의 명문규정화(진정한 의미의 ‘알기 쉬운 민법’) (4) 개정의 순서 등에 대한 검토가 이루어져야 함을 지적하였다. 그리고 개정의 절차와 관련해서는 (1) 개정위원회 내부에서의 개정안 확정을 위한 의사결정 규칙의 제정 (2) 개정안의 단계적 공표와 의견수렴 등을 통한 국민적 관심의 환기 (3) 외국법의 내용이나 개정에 관한 자료를 제공해 줄 수 있는 국책연구기관의 설립이 필요하다는 점 등을 강조하였다. 나아가 궁극적으로는 정치권과 민법연구자 모두가 우리 민법의 개정이란 애당초 타율적 계수를 통해 이루어진 민법전을 우리 손으로 ‘재법전화’하는 작업이라는 소명의식을 공유하는 것이야말로 향후 민법개정의 성패를 결정짓는 될 중요한 요인이라는 점을 지적하였다. 나아가 이 글에서는 2010년-2012년 법무부 산하 민법개정위원회의 불법행위분과 분과위원장으로서 불법행위법 개정안 작성을 담당했던 필자의 경험을 토대로 그간의 경위 및 개정안의 요지와 불법행위법을 포함한 법정채권분야의 개정에 있어서의 앞으로의 과제 등에 관해서도 언급하였다. 아울러 위험책임에 관한 일반규정의 신설과 징벌적 손해배상제도의 도입에 관한 필자의 견해도 간단히 밝혀 두었다.

不法行爲法上의 過失의 槪念 : 主觀的過失說批判

嚴東燮 啓明大學校 社會科學硏究所 1987 한국사회과학연구 Vol.5 No.-