社会変動の中の家族法改正 : 日中台比較の中の日本家族法

高橋 孝治(Takahashi, Koji) 고려대학교 글로벌일본연구원 2018 일본연구 Vol.30 No.-

日本の民法の家族法部分は、大日本帝国憲法が日本国憲法に改正されたことに伴い全面改正された。これは大日本帝国憲法施行下から日本国憲法施行下という社会変動に応じた法改正と言える。ところで、台湾(中華民国)も戒厳令が解除され、社会が民主化へと向かっていく社会変動の時期に家族法が改正されている。また、中国(中華人民共和国)も改革開放政策開始という社会変動が始まってすぐに新しい家族法が制定されている。ここから、日本、台湾、中国では社会変動期には家族法にも変化があると言える。本稿は、このような社会変 動期の家族法改正を比較して、日本の家族法改正から見える特色は何なのかを明らかにすることを目的とする。結論としては、以下のように述べる。日本国憲法施行に伴い、文言については家族法は大改正したものの、その実態は婚姻後の姓に着目する限りは、日本は伝統的男女観が継続していると言える。その意味では、男女平等の思想などを知っているにも関わらず、特に家族法については伝統を克服できない社会が日本の特色と言える。そして、少なくとも条文上は、日本と台湾は民主化前後において、男女平等へ向けた家族法の改正を行っており、時代は異なるものの、日本の1947年前後の家族法改正と台湾の1990年代前後の家族法改正には比較可能性があるとも述べる。 The family law part of Japan s civil law was completely revised as the Constitution of the Empire of Japan was revised to the Constitution of Japan. This is a revision of the law according to social change that it was revised from the Constitution of the Empire of Japan to the Constitution of Japan. By the way, also in Taiwan, family law is amended at the time of social change when society moves toward democratization, with martial law being lifted. In other words, in Japan, Taiwan, China it can be said that there is a change in family law during social change period. This paper aims to clarify what features are visible from Japan s revision of the family law by comparing the revision of family law in such a period of social change. In conclusion, it states as follows. Following the enforcement of the Constitution of Japan, although the family law has been revised largely for wording, as long as attention is focused on the surname after marriage, the view of traditional male and female continues in Japan. In other words, despite knowing gender equality thought, society that can not overcome tradition, especially with respect to family law, is a characteristic of Japan. And at least in the provisional text, Japan and Taiwan have amended family law for gender equality before and after democratization, and although the times are different, Japan s revision of family law around 1947 and Taiwan s 1990s We also mention that there is comparability in revising the family law.

社會變動の中の家族法改正日中台比較の中の日本家族法

高橋孝治 ( Takahashi Koji ) 고려대학교 글로벌일본연구원 2018 일본연구 Vol.30 No.0

The family law part of Japan's civil law was completely revised as the Constitution of the Empire of Japan was revised to the Constitution of Japan. This is a revision of the law according to social change that it was revised from the Constitution of the Empire of Japan to the Constitution of Japan. By the way, also in Taiwan, family law is amended at the time of social change when society moves toward democratization, with martial law being lifted. In other words, in Japan, Taiwan, China it can be said that there is a change in family law during social change period. This paper aims to clarify what features are visible from Japan's revision of the family law by comparing the revision of family law in such a period of social change. In conclusion, it states as follows. Following the enforcement of the Constitution of Japan, although the family law has been revised largely for wording, as long as attention is focused on the surname after marriage, the view of traditional male and female continues in Japan. In other words, despite knowing gender equality thought, society that can not overcome tradition, especially with respect to family law, is a characteristic of Japan. And at least in the provisional text, Japan and Taiwan have amended family law for gender equality before and after democratization, and although the times are different, Japan's revision of family law around 1947 and Taiwan's 1990s We also mention that there is comparability in revising the family law.

『満洲国』における公訴時効制度の考察

高橋孝治 ( Takahashi Koji ) 고려대학교 글로벌일본연구원 2020 일본연구 Vol.34 No.0

The prescriptive law for public prosecution is a system where a suspect cannot be prosecuted after a certain statutory period has elapsed from the occurrence of a crime. There is a negative aspect to the introduction of the prescriptive statute system because it will not be possible to punish resistance movements against the colonial power in colonies. By the way, Japan used to have many colonies, but there was a “nation” called “Manchoukuo,” which is a “virtual colony.” Although “Manchoukuo” was formally an “independent state,” the reality was that it was a puppet state in Japan. This paper studies the prescription prescription system in “Manchoukuo.” From the standpoint of the history of Japanese legal system, the colonial legal system including “Manchoukuo” should be considered as part of Japanese law for research, but in the history of Japanese legal system so far, Is not the subject of research. This article is also intended to fill in the gaps in this study of Japanese legal history. In this paper, we will review and examine the articles, theories, and precedents concerning the prescription prescription system in “Manchoukuo.” In conclusion, from the viewpoint of the prescription time limit system, “Manchoukuo” was still a “Japanese colony” and it was very strong that it mimicked the Japanese text of “sovereign country”. In the above, in Manchoukuo, the prescriptive statutes of lawsuits are not functioning effectively due to amnesty and regulations, and the theory has not been considered so much. Suppose you can see some of the theory that goes.

社会変動の中の刑事訴訟法改正 ― 日中台比較の中の日本刑事訴訟法 ―

高橋 孝治(다카하시 고지) 한국외국어대학교 일본연구소 2020 일본연구 Vol.0 No.85

Japan, Taiwan, and China experienced major social changes such as the enforcement of the Japanese Constitution, the release of martial law, and the launch of reform and open policies. The enforcement of the Japanese constitution and the removal of martial law were democratization, and the start of reform and open policy was the introduction of Western law theory. And at these times, the criminal procedure law was revised in Japan, Taiwan, and China. Although this era is different, Japan, Taiwan, and China may have had similar legislative amendments due to these social changes, that is, human rights protection under the criminal procedure law may have been strengthened. Make it clear. Therefore, I will look at this as a material to determine whether or not a confession can be convicted. The conclusion of this paper is that China did not apply, but Japan and Taiwan agree with this hypothesis. Furthermore, as a characteristic of Japan, there is both a theory and a practical intention to convict as much as possible by confession, and in that sense, there is still a strong legal culture that criminal lawsuits still have a questioning aspect. Also say that there is.

安倍晋三⋅元内閣総理大臣銃撃事件から見る日台関係の考察

高橋孝治 ( Koji Takahashi ) 한림대학교 일본학연구소 2022 한림일본학 Vol.- No.41

Shinzo Abe, who served as Prime Minister in Japan, was shot dead on July 9, 2022. There were many opinions about this from all over the world. Among them, Taiwan (Republic of China) expresses particularly strong condolences. However, judging from Taiwanese newspaper reports, it seems that the condolences are not pure condolences, but rather amajor loss to Taiwan's security. Based on this point, this article reviews Japan-Taiwan relations from the shooting and death of Shinzo Abe. And looking at Shinzo Abe's evaluation in Taiwan, he once said that an emergency in Taiwan is an emergency in Japan. This seems to be a reference to the requirements for the exercise of the right to collective self-defense under the Security Law, which was enacted under Shinzo Abe's leadership, despite being accused of being unconstitutional in 2015. This paper points out that Taiwanese media and politicians highly value Shinzo Abe for creating a path for Japan to cooperate with Taiwan's defense in the event of a Taiwanese emergency. The conclusion of this paper is that even if Taiwan is made possible by the Security Law, cooperation with Japan's defense of Taiwan through the right of collective self-defense, which is highly likely to be unconstitutional and invalid under the Japanese Constitution, is Shinzo Abe's ``Emergency in Taiwan is an emergency in Japan.'' He has high expectations from his words, and says that there are aspects of Japan-Taiwan relations that are built on mutual misunderstandings.

大正刑事訴訟法制定時の公訴時効制度改正経緯に関する検討

高橋 孝治(다카하시 고지) 단국대학교 일본연구소 2023 일본학연구 Vol.70 No.-

公訴時効制度とは、犯罪の発生から一定の法定期間が経過した場合、被疑者に対して刑事訴訟の起訴ができなくなるという制度である。この制度は日本では一貫して刑事訴訟法に規定されている。1890年10月6日公布(同年11月1日施行)の明治刑訴法は、1922年5月4日公布で全面改正された(1924年1月1日施行。大正刑訴法)。この明治刑訴法から大正刑訴法への改正時の公訴時効制度改正に関する議論を再検討するのが本稿である。 明治刑訴法から大正刑訴法への改正時に、公訴時効制度は規定する章の位置が変わるなど大きな改正がなされている。このような改正時の議論を検討することは、当時の日本の法律に対する考え方を見つめ直すという意味でも重要と言えよう。 本稿は、少なくとも公訴時効制度に着目すると、官僚機構が起草した法律案を帝国議会で特に質疑もなく可決していることを明らかにする。この点から、大正期から既に、官僚機構の作成した法案を帝国議会がそのまま質疑もなく承認するという方式が見え、日本はこの頃から官僚統治の要素があったと本稿は指摘する。

日本領樺太における公訴時効制度の考察

高橋孝治 단국대학교 동아시아인문융복합연구소(구 단국대학교 일본연구소) 2021 일본학연구 Vol.62 No.-

日本における2018年改正相続法に関する考察

高橋孝治 단국대학교 동아시아인문융복합연구소(구 단국대학교 일본연구소) 2019 일본학연구 Vol.58 No.-

日本における法定労働時間および時間外手当を巡る法制度の変遷考

高橋孝治 ( Takahashi Koji ) 한림대학교 일본학연구소 2020 翰林日本學 Vol.0 No.36

日本では 「働き方改革を推進するための関係法律の整備に関する法律(以下 「働き方改革法」)」が2018年6月29日に国会で可決された。この働き方改革法第1条により、「残業代ゼロ法」と批判されている高度プロフェッショナル制度が導入された。高度プロフェッショナル制度は、職務の範囲が明確で少なくとも1,075万円以上の年収を有する労働者が、高度の専門的知識を必要とする等の業務に従事する場合に、年間104日の休日を確実に取得させること等の健康確保措置を講じること、本人の同意や委員会の決議等を要件として、労働時間、休日、深夜の割増賃金等の規定を適用除外とするものである。このような制度が導入されたことを契機として、日本における時間外手当および法定労働時間を巡る法制度の変遷を顧みて、日本の労働法制を検討し直すのが本稿である 本稿は、日本の労働法制は、「労働者保護」のために必ずしも資してきたわけではないことを明らかにする。それは、労働基準法制定からしばらく後に日本の国会で 「諸外国では時間外手当を40%増としている国もあるが、わが国では25%とした」という発言があり、時間外手当の法定基準が日本は他国と比べても低いということを知りながら、現在も法定時間外手当は基本的には25%以上増とされていること、さらに、裁量労働制、変形労働時間制と、さらに高度プロフェッショナル制度と日本の労働法制の中から、時間外労働に対する手当の支払いを必須ではなくす制度が導入されて現在に至っていることからも言える。そして、さらに本稿は、結論として日本の労働法制は、初期の頃から労働者保護の側面が弱かったが、一見すると労働者有利の法改正に合わせて、企業に配慮した改正も行っており、必ずしも労働者保護の法制度ではないと指摘する。 In Japan, the “Work Style Reform Act” was enacted on June 29, 2018. This Article 1 introduced a highly professional system, which is criticized as the "Zero Overtime Law". According to this system, the rules such as working hours and holidays are not applied to workers who have a clear scope of work and who have an annual income of 10.75 million yen or more that meets at least specific requirements. With the introduction of this system, this paper studies the history of the legal system of overtime allowances and legal working hours in Japan. This paper makes clear that Japanese labor law is not for "worker protection". Some time after the enactment of the Labor Standards Law, there was a statement in the Japanese Diet that "the overtime allowance was increased by 40% in foreign countries, but it was increased to 25% in Japan", and the legal standard for overtime allowance in Japan is I know that the overtime allowance is basically increased by 25% or more, and that the discretionary work system, the modified working time system, the highly professional system and the Japanese labor law system are also known. Among them, it can be said that a system has been introduced that makes payment of allowance for overtime work unnecessary. Furthermore, he concludes that Japan’s labor law system has weakened the aspect of worker protection from the early days, and at the first glance, it has been revised in consideration of companies along with the revision of the law that favors workers.

「満洲国」における公訴時効制度の研究

高橋 孝治(다카하시 고지) 고려대학교 글로벌일본연구원 2020 일본연구 Vol.34 No.-

The prescriptive law for public prosecution is a system where a suspect cannot be prosecuted after a certain statutory period has elapsed from the occurrence of a crime. There is a negative aspect to the introduction of the prescriptive statute system because it will not be possible to punish resistance movements against the colonial power in colonies. By the way, Japan used to have many colonies, but there was a “nation” called “Manchoukuo,” which is a “virtual colony.” Although “Manchoukuo” was formally an “independent state,” the reality was that it was a puppet state in Japan. This paper studies the prescription prescription system in “Manchoukuo.” From the standpoint of the history of Japanese legal system, the colonial legal system including “Manchoukuo” should be considered as part of Japanese law for research, but in the history of Japanese legal system so far, Is not the subject of research. This article is also intended to fill in the gaps in this study of Japanese legal history. In this paper, we will review and examine the articles, theories, and precedents concerning the prescription prescription system in “Manchoukuo.” In conclusion, from the viewpoint of the prescription time limit system, “Manchoukuo” was still a “Japanese colony” and it was very strong that it mimicked the Japanese text of “sovereign country”. In the above, in Manchoukuo, the prescriptive statutes of lawsuits are not functioning effectively due to amnesty and regulations, and the theory has not been considered so much. Suppose you can see some of the theory that goes. 公訴時効制度とは、犯罪の発生から一定の法定期間が経過した場合、被疑者に対して起訴ができなくなるという制度である。公訴時効制度はいうなれば、単なる時間の経過で犯罪に問うことができなくなるという制度であり、植民地などでは宗主国に対する抵抗運動を処罰できなくなるという面からその導入に否定的な側面がある。ところで、日本はかつては多くの植民地を保有していたが、「事実上の植民地」である「満洲国」と呼ばれる「国家」があった。「満洲国」は形式的には「独立国家」であったが、その実態は日本の傀儡国家であった。本稿は、この「満洲国」における公訴時効制度を研究するものである。日本法制史の立場からは、「満洲国」を始めとする植民地法制も日本法の一部と捉えて研究がされるべきであるが、これまでの日本法制史の中では植民地法制は研究の俎上に上がっていない。本稿は、この日本法制史の研究の隙間を埋めるためのものでもある。 本稿では、「満洲国」における公訴時効制度に関する条文、学説、判例などを概観し検討をする。結論としては、公訴時効制度から見た場合、「満洲国」はやはり「日本の植民地」であり、「宗主国」である日本の条文を真似たという側面が非常に強いものであったとした上で、「満洲国」では公訴時効制度は規定こそあれ、大赦などによって事実上あまり機能しておらず、学説についてもあまり検討されていなかったものの、 「宗主国たる日本」の学説の先を行く学説を一部で見ることができるとする。