러시아가족법상 법정부부재산제의 어제와 오늘

이제우(Lee, Je-Woo) 한국가족법학회 2015 가족법연구 Vol.29 No.3

Comparative law analyses on marital property regimes, and community property in particular almost always focus on a select number of legal systems, such as those of France, Italy and certain American states. It is unfortunate that Russian family law which adopted the community property regime in 1926 is rarely, if ever, mentioned in such studies. However the fact that in Russia spouses have for almost a century enjoyed joint ownership of property acquired during marriage, should not be neglected. On the contrary, given that Russian family law takes its roots from socialist family law, which is still prevalent in many parts of the world, including former Soviet republics as well as North Korea and China, it deserves to be the subject of extensive research. In the present work the author examines the theoretical foundation and historical background of community property in Russia. Special focus is placed on identifying the rationale behind the legislation of the revolutionary lawmakers of the first half of the 20th century in Soviet Russia. No less important is the emphasis on how Russian family law influenced the marital property regime in North Korea. The present work also studies the current Russian property regime between spouses. Both doctrine and case law are explored thoroughly. Such research reveals among other things that the balance between the independence of spouses and the communal nature of marriage, is skewed in favor of the latter. Such a conclusion may have important implications for the marital property regime in Korea.

가족법학회 남기고 싶은 이야기

한봉희,이희배 한국가족법학회 2008 가족법연구 Vol.22 No.3

러시아가족법상 법정부부재산제의 어제와 오늘

이제우 한국가족법학회 2015 한국가족법학회 학술대회 논문집 Vol.2015 No.3

韓國家族法學會의 規約·規程 외

편집부 한국가족법학회 2009 가족법연구 Vol.23 No.2

가족법에 있어서의 ‘당신도’라는 코드의 작동과 그에 대한 도전 : 다문화가족과 동성혼

오정진 한국가족법학회 2012 가족법연구 Vol.26 No.3

This paper is written on the base of the one of methods and theories of Niklas Luhmann. According to Luhmann, Legal system has codes which cognize environment and differentiate illegal/legal, non-adaptive/adaptive and include selectively only the latter to sustain and evolve autopoietic system itself. And ‘You, too’ is one of the most popular codes. In so many cases, ‘You, too’ code is operated to apply same statutes to pending similar case supported by equality. In the field of Family Law of Korea, especially regarding gender equality, there have been many cases ‘You, too’ code used. And recently multicultural family and same-sex marriage have become main objects of that code. Firstly, in Korea, multicultural family is constructed by international marriage, between mostly Korean man living in rural communities and foreign woman, which is encouraged by government that you, rural bachelor, can get married, too. Secondly, although same-sex marriage is not yet possible in law, such marriage is argued that homosexual partners have equal rights of marriage. But multicultural family and same-sex marriage composed by ‘You can marry, too’ have severe limits; Multicultural family assumes existing normal partriarchal family so there are problems such as family violence intact and in even worse human rights violations and just assimilation to Korean family is pushed without understanding multiculturalism. And in so far as same-sex marriage is claimed legal one there are little room for alternative intimate relationship. In that manner, with the support of sameness code, family law system will still survive in spite of many challenges and we might live in that cage for long time.

남북한 가족법의 변천과 남북통일 후 가족법의 미래상

신영호 한국가족법학회 2015 한국가족법학회 학술대회 논문집 Vol.2015 No.2

가족에 대한 법적ㆍ사회적 개념의 통합 필요성

김용화(Kim Yonghua) 한국가족법학회 2008 가족법연구 Vol.22 No.2

Family, which is the standard unit of human society, has maintained its tradition and solidarity around marriage and blood in these changes of human civilization. By the concept from the dictionary, a family is a group of kindred or closely related individuals and adults with responsibilities of care of children. Also, to an individual it is the first experience of a group as the very first regulator; it gives continuous effects to one’s life more than any other things and at the same time it secures the continuation of the society. Therefore, a family is social system of everything made through the family including relations by marriage, parents-children relationship, birth, motherhood, and division of labor by gender and although there are differences in the form and function it still is the one of the most generalized systems. However, as a system of society, there are variety of families which breaches over the extent of traditional definition of family due to the magnification of individualism and the concept of equality following the changes of social structure and social acceptance caused by the following reasons: upward tendency of age of marriage, increasing population of unmarried people, divorce and remarriage, decreasing number of childbirth, and the aging society. Single parent family, remarried family, Same-Sex family, multicultural family, cohabitation and/or ba helor household, teen household, grandparents and grandchildren household and boarding houses are what called as the ‘alternative family’. Generally, the concept of a family presumes the support, raising and living community. From the same context, these people are treated as abnormal families by law and from society even though they are families in reality. These varieties of families are no longer a personal matter caused by individual choice but a social problem. The problem of varying families can not be solved with laws those are established upon the standard of pre-existing families. Which means that traditional and conservative concept of family can not accept the ‘alternative family’ as general family because of the insufficiency of the social recognition and law and institutional inertia. Therefore, to change the recognition of varying families which coexist as members of community, unification of legal and social concepts of family is inevitable. By doing so, we can prepare the ground for legal acceptance of variety of families followed by embodiment of reasonable family policy and also induce the change of social recognition.

재혼가족의 친족법적 과제

김은아(EUN A KIM) 한국가족법학회 2010 가족법연구 Vol.24 No.3

Our society is in a state of flux. Because it’s very difficult to define for the Concept of Family. For this reason, it is prescribed by the current law in various ways. For example, the Civil Law, the Basic Code of Healthy Families, the Income Tax Law and so on. But these laws have done little to prescribe for the concept of Family in our changing society. Especially these have done little to prescribe for legal standing of the Remarried Family. It may be bring about serious marital problems with the high rates of divorce and remarriage. The reason for this is that our Family Law does not conform with regulations on the Remarried Family. As a result, the Remarried Family is curbed by the Family law in comparison with the normal family. Therefore, it requires to fill a distinct gap in family law. First of all, Our Family Law accords the similar effect of law to the remarried family in comparison with normal family. And it is important to minimize for the interference of on’s biological parents on the changing of children’s family name and family clan. Throughout legal action, the Family law have to provide the Custody and Visiting Right with Step parents. It requires further checkup to the duty of supporting among the step parents and the step children. Finally, we need to pay a constant attention to the problems of the remarried family in the family law.

남북한가족법의 변천과 남북통일 후 가족법의 미래상

신영호(Shin, Young-Ho) 한국가족법학회 2015 가족법연구 Vol.29 No.3

This paper is an extension of a keynote paper titled “The Impact of Division and Unification on Family Law: Implications from the Experiences of East Asia’s Divided Countries.” It was originally presented August 22 at the 2015 International Conference on the Present and Future of Family Law in South and North Korea: A 70-Year Division, hosted by the Korean Society of Family Law. The paper provides an overview of the development process of family law in South and North Korea since the liberation of the peninsula; explores the elements of North Korea’s family law that should remain in effect, at least temporarily, after the reunification of South and North Korea; and examines whether there are elements of North Korea’s family law that should be embraced in post-reunification consolidated family law. This paper is composed of as follows; The basic order of liberal democracy must be the cornerstone for family law in a unified Korea. This principle squarely contradicts the legal order of family law founded on North Korea’s socialist system. Nonetheless, the understanding of family relations established among North Koreans should not be changed unilaterally. It may be necessary to acknowledge the provisional and transitional effects of family law or inheritance law until the unification of laws has been completed. Even after the completion of the process of unifying family law, however, it is assumed that the estrangement between people of South and North Korea in terms of consciousness, understanding, modes of living and legal practices with respect to various institutions under family law will not easily be resolved, owing to the length of the division of nations. The issue of resolving these divisions will remain even after the consolidation of family law. It may be difficult to declare that unification or consolidation has actually been achieved as long as the problem remains unaddressed.

일본 개정 유류분법의 해석과 적용

이소은(Soeun Lee) 한국가족법학회 2023 가족법연구 Vol.37 No.2

The amendment of Japanese inheritance law, promulgated on July 13, 2018 and inacted on July 1, 2019, has changed a wide range of legal relations with regard to imperative inheritance. The most remarkable change in imperative inheritance law is Article 1046 of Japanese Civil Code which stipulates that the heir who may claim the forced heir’s right shall claim restitution in money. Under the new law, the heir who claimed the forced heir’s right no longer has the right in rem over the property given to a third person. This article reviews each provision of Japanese imperative inheritance law and the academic discussion in Japan thereof. Based on the review, I suggest amendment of some provisions of the Korean Civil Code (hereinafter “KCC”). More specifically, I suggest the following amendments: (a) the range of the heir who may claim the forced heir’s right shall be reduced to the spouse and children of the deceased; (b) the forced heir’s right shall be constructed as monetary claim; (c) the range of donation that becomes the subject of the said right shall also be reduced in terms of time period; (d) the order of restitution shall be stipulated in KCC; (e) the potential heirs shall be able to abandon the said right in advance.