로스쿨 인가기준확보의 효과적인 방안

홍춘의(洪春義) 강원대학교 비교법학연구소 2005 江原法學 Vol.21 No.-

법인 아닌 사단의 법률관계

홍춘의 한국토지법학회 2010 土地法學 Vol.26 No.2

한국에서 법인 아닌 사단의 법률관계에 관한 규율은 재산의 귀속관계에 관한 총유규정의 적용과 학설과 판례에 의한 사단법인규정의 유추적용이라는 큰 틀에서 이루어지고 있다. 그런데 이 두 개의 적용규범은 반드시 상호모순적이라고는 할 수 없지만 입법취지 등이 다르게 때문에 실제의 문제해결에 있어서는 많은 문제점을 야기하고 있다. 특히 총유규정은 그 규정내용이 지나치게 간단하고 추상적이어서 법인 아닌 사단의 법률관계에 대한 근거규범으로서 일정한 한계를 안고 있다. 또 법인규정의 유추적용에도 어느 규정을 유추적용하느냐에 따라 결론이 달라지는 문제점이 있다. 이러한 문제점을 해결하기 위하여 입법론으로 법인 아닌 사단에 권리능력을 인정하자는 주장, 총유규정을 폐지하자는 주장 등 다양한 안이 제시되고 있으나 일치된 결론에는 이르지 못하고 있다. 이 논문은 이러한 문제 상황에서 법인 아닌 사단의 법률관계에 관한 한국의 판례와 학설의 검토를 통하여 한국법의 현주소를 명확히 함으로써 한일 양국의 법인 아닌 사단에 관한 논의와 법률문제해결에 단서를 제공하도록 한다. 그리하여 논문의 ‘Ⅱ’에서는 법인 아닌 사단에 관한 본격적인 논의의 전개를 위하여 ‘법인 아닌 사단의 개념’, ‘총유에 관한 규정의 내용’ 및 ‘법인 아닌 사단의 법률관계에 대한 사단법인 규정의 유추적용’에 대하여 총론적으로 필자의 입장을 명확히 하였다. 이어서 논문의 ‘Ⅲ’에서는 법인 아닌 사단의 내부관계에 대하여 중요한 쟁점을 제공하고 있는 교회분열과 재산귀속의 문제에 대하여 분석하였다. 한국 판례는 일찍부터 교회를 민법상의 법인 아닌 사단으로 보면서도 민법이 규정하고 있지 않은 사단법인의 분열에 해당하는 교회의 분열 개념을 인정하고, 분열된 교회의 재산은 분열 당시의 교인들의 총유에 속한다고 하여 왔다. 그러나 대법원 2006. 4. 20. 선고 2003다37775 전원합의체 판결은 종전 입장을 변경하였다. 즉 교회의 분열을 원칙적으로 인정하지 않고, 다만 종전교회의 이탈자가 의결권자의 2/3 이상인 경우에는 종전 교회의 실체는 위 탈퇴자들로 이루어진 교회로서 존속하고, 종전교회의 재산은 위 탈퇴한 교회 소속 교인들의 총유로 귀속된다는 새로운 법리를 전개하였다. 이 판결의 입장에 대하여는 비판하는 견해가 강하지만 이 논문은 교회분쟁에 대한 실효성있는 해결 그리고 종전교회의 교회실체의 유지라는 관점에서 대법원의 입장이 타당하다는 것을 밝혔다. 이 논문의 ‘Ⅳ’에서는 법인 아닌 사단의 외부 법률관계에 관하여 ‘법인 아닌 사단의 대표자가 한 금전채무 보증행위’에 대하여 분석하였다. 이와 관련하여 대법원 2007. 4. 19. 선고 2004다60072, 60089 전원합의체 판결은 사원총회의 결의를 거치지 않은 총유물의 관리․처분행위는 무효가 된다는 입장을 취하면서, 이로 인하여 피해를 입게 되는 거래 상대방의 이익과 거래안전의 보호를 위한 방법으로 사원총회의 결의를 요하는 ‘총유물의 관리․처분행위’의 의미를 엄격하게 해석하여 그 범위를 좁히는 해석을 하고 있다. 그런데 2007년 전원합의체 판결의 입장에 반대하는 견해는 보증채무부담행위를 총유물의 관리․처분행위에 해당하지 않는다고 해석하는 방법으로 거래의 안전보호를 도모하는 것은 지나치게 형식논리에 치우친 것이라고 비판하면서 법인규정의 유추적용에 의한 총유규정의 ... Regulations of legal issues surrounding an association without legal personality have performed generally in two ways; applying the collective ownership provisions to deal with right of property and inferring entity with legal personality provisions by legal theories and precedents. However, these two ways of application, not definitely contradictory each other, originally have significant problems because they have different purposes of the enactment. Especially, provisions related to a collective ownership are too short to solve the legal problems about an association without legal personality due to its simple and abstract concept. Furthermore, inference of legal entity provisions also has problems because the result can be changed depending on which provision would be applied. This paper tries to suggest the ways to solve these problems by examining theories and relevant precedents about an association without legal personality case. Part II in this paper starts from making clear the concept of an association without legal personality, meaning of collective ownership provisions and analogical application of entity with legal personality provisions to an association without legal personality. And then it analyzes problems about the church split and right of property thereof which provide critical issues related with inner relationship of an association without legal personality in Chapter III. Ironically, Korean Courts have regarded church as an association without legal personality and have accepted church split concept at the same time although the Korean Civil Law does not apply to the entity with legal personality split. So the Courts have ruled the property of divided church belongs to the church members collectively at the time of split. However, they changed their position through the decision "2003da37775" by the Supreme Court of Korea on 2006. 4. 20. This rule basically does not admit the church split. But if the members who have right to vote seceding from the church are over 2/3, the previous church keeps itself consisted of the seceders and the property before the split belongs to these members as a collective ownership. This decision has been criticized strongly but this paper supports the Court's ruling with respect of efficient resolution against the church conflict and maintaining the church itself. In Chapter IV, it examines a guaranty of payment by a representative of an association without legal personality for understanding the external relationship of this association. In connection with this problem, the Supreme Court of Korea 2007. 4. 19 2004da60072, 60089 decision narrowly interpreted the article 276(1), which requires of the general meeting resolution for the control and disposal of collective property for protecting who deals with an association without legal personality and safety of transaction. This ruling is also criticized that interpreting a guaranty of payment does not fit with the control and disposal of collective property for promoting the safety of transaction is too much formal and the safety of transaction should be protected by restrictive interpretation of collective ownership through analogical application of entity with legal personality provisions. However, this critical opinion can not be accepted because this criticism is too far from the history and purpose of the article 276(1). This provision does not simply intend to restrict the power of representative. Rather, protection of a third party who transacts with an association without legal personality can be achieved by the literal and direct interpretation of the article 276(1) as in the Court decision. With conclusion, this paper sums up with suggesting some points after recognizing that the legal theory of an association without legal personality in Korea has developed its own way. First of all, the Court's decision tries to solve the legal problem of an association without legal personality through the positive interpre...

현행 프랑스 친자법과 친권법의 발전과 동향

홍춘의 한국가족법학회 1999 가족법연구 Vol.13 No.-

발간사

홍춘의 전북대학교 법학연구소 2011 法學硏究 Vol.32 No.-

名譽毁損과 民事責任

洪春義 전북대학교 법학연구소 1992 法學硏究 Vol.19 No.-

人格權의 保護에 관한 硏究

洪春義 전북대학교 법학연구소 1986 法學硏究 Vol.13 No.-

Summary Personality interests are protected by law to an extent which varies both according to time and country in the field of private law, where the development of personality interests has, generally specking, been more recent than in constitutional, criminal law, they are considered as "legitimate interest" or "absolute rights" in various system, while in many countries, especially common law countries, they are protected by actions in tort, in others such protection is sought by means of the theory of "rights of personality". In the past, the sense of honor was probably the interest to whose protection most importance was attached. All legal system incuded various, well-tried remedies for the redress of disparaged reputation. Today, new types of intrusions into the realm of the individual's private sphere which do not fall within the well-established categories of injuries to persons or property have appareared. So the protection of therights of the personality becomes on of the legal problems in our country these days. The purposes of this study are to establish new proper principles applicable to the protection of the rights of the personality. The contents of this study is followings Ⅰ. Introduction. Ⅱ. The development of the rights of the personality. Ⅲ. The legal character of the rights of the personality. Ⅳ. The violation of the rights of the personality and injuction. Ⅴ. Conclusion.

가정폭력관련법제의 개혁

홍춘의(Choon-Eui HONG) 한국가족법학회 2011 가족법연구 Vol.25 No.2

It is thirteen years since Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Domestic Violence and Act on the Prevention of Domestic Violence and Protection, etc. of Victims thereof have enacted in 1997 and enforced in 1998. Meanwhile, these acts have significantly contributed to protecting the victims from domestic violence. However, first of all, current acts of domestic violence do not secure the effectiveness of victims because of dualistic system of acts related with domestic violence it causes confusion in the direction and policy. Secondly, although Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Domestic Violence provides emergence measures of police officer, temporary protection measure by request of prosecutor as well as restraining order for protection measure and restriction of parental rights as criminal probation, these measures are not used well. Futhermore, these measures are a kind of criminal procedures and have some functional limitations, they can not protect the victims fully. Under this situation, Act on Special Cases concerning the Punishment of Domestic Violence was amended in June 29, 2011 and introduced “civil protection orders”. This amendment is estimated as a historical event on the legislative action against domestic violence in Korea. However, it still consists of dualistic system and the contents of protection orders are limited. It means that the scope of offenders and victims are narrow and the types of protection orders are not diverse. So, this paper critically examines the legislative characteristic and details of current acts relevant domestic violence and makes clear about the problems of the acts. After then, it comparatively analyzes American and Japanese legislative systems which have actively taken action against domestic violence for gaining implication for amendment. In conclusion, this paper insists on throwing out the current dualistic system and enacting uniform act combining criminal protection proceedings, civil protection orders and administrative support proceedings against domestic violence. Moreover, it suggests that it should extend the scope of party of domestic violence and the types of domestic violence, and should diversify protection orders for protecting victims effectively. Especially it argues a kind of limited protection order that the victim is free from domestic violence while she keeps in touch with the dependant.

간통과 손해배상

홍춘의 한국가족법학회 1994 가족법연구 Vol.8 No.-

獨占規制法違反行爲와 損害賠償責任

洪春義 한국기업법학회 2000 企業法硏究 Vol.5 No.-

법학전문대학원(로스쿨) 도입의 바람직한 방향

홍춘의 열린전북 2004 열린전북 Vol.2004 No.11