일본의 성년후견제도와 우리나라의 성년후견법안의 비교 = A Comparison of the Adult Guardianship Laws of Japan with the Adult Guardianship Bill of Korean

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

  Our country’s social problem of low birth rate and aging is at a severe level. Currently, the legal system to actively deal with the problem of low birth rate and aging through Korean civil laws is extremely inadequate. In particular, as we become an aged society, the civil laws which is applied when the mental judgement is deteriorated, has many problems.<BR>  Under the current civil laws, incompetence and quasi-incompetence system can be used in case of deterioration of mental judgement. In the cases of incompetence and quasi-incompetence system, the system itself is rigid since it can only provide two types by law despite the fact that there are various degrees of mental judgement and protection needs based on each individual. And it is pronounced as incompetence and quasi-incompetence, it will be recorded in the census registration and hence there are hardly anyone who use this system. In addition, there are resistance and social prejudice against the words such as incompetence and quasi-incompetence. Hence, the system is practically not being used and is ending up as a mere scrap paper.<BR>  The same situation is applicable to Japan. Hence, in order to actively deal with these problems, Japan enforced the new adult guardianship laws on 1 April, 2000. There has been discussions of introducing the adult guardianship laws but this ended up as just discussions, being excluded from the civil laws that was proposed in the National Assembly on 21 October 2004. And the adult guardianship laws was later proposed on 28 August 2006. Hence, this paper researches what should be considered in our laws by making comparative study of the Korean and Japanese adult guardianship laws.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 들어가는 말
  Ⅱ. 일본의 성년후견제도의 개관
  Ⅲ. 우리나라의 성년후견법안의 개관
  Ⅳ. 맺는 말
  【참고문헌】
  [Abstract]
  

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 홍춘의, "후견제도 개혁의 과제" 16 (16): 2002

2 大田仁史, "환자가 주인 되는 새로운 케어 기술" 동학사 2005

3 문흥안, "현행법상 무능력자보호의 제도적 한계, 김형배교수화갑기념논문집" 박영사 1994

4 김주수, "친족ㆍ상속법" 법문사 2005

5 한국지방자치학회, "지방자치사전" 보성각 1998

6 통계청, "장래인구 특별추계 결과"

7 오호철, "일본의 성년후견제도의 개선 논의에 대한 동향" 한국비교사법학회 13 (13): 2006

8 장현옥, "우리나라 후견제도의 문제점과 개선방향" 아세아여성법학연구소 3 : 2000

9 이병화, "성년후견제도의 도입에 따른 국제후견법의 재고찰" 한국비교사법학회 13 (13): 2006

10 송호열, "성년후견법제에 관한 연구" 동아대학교 2002

11 곽윤직, "민법주해, 총칙" 박영사 1996

12 곽윤직, "민법주해" 박영사 2006

13 北野俊光, "高齡者支援の手段としての任意後見契約" 77 (77): 2005

14 石田喜久夫, "講義 民法總則" 靑林書院 1992

15 中川高男, "親族ㆍ相續法講義" ミネルウ?ァ書房 1994

16 高村 浩, "補助類型の利用方法" (1141) : 1998

17 岩井伸晃, "補助制度の新設の意義と機能" (1172) : 2000

18 後藤力哉, "生活支援の方法を探る" 民事法硏究會 (9) : 2004

19 野村好弘, "準禁治産制度と法人制度の改正問題-民法及び民法施行法の一部改正法案の考察" (696) : 1979

20 藤原正則, "死後委任事務の判例と成年後見への?用の可能性" 民事法硏究會 (10) : 2004

21 ?塚沼次, "條解 民法Ⅱ 債權法" 三省堂 1989

22 松津節子, "最近の禁治産ㆍ準禁治産事件の現狀" (1141) : 1998

23 永田菊四郞, "新民法要義 第三卷 下(債權各論)" 株式會社 テイハソ 1978

24 ?塚沼次, "新ㆍ判例こンメンタ?ル民法 8" 三省堂 1997

25 小川秀樹, "新しい成年後見制度の槪要" (1172) : 2000

26 小賀野晶一, "成年後見監護制度論" 信山社出版 2000

27 大鷹一郞, "成年後見登記制度について" (1172) : 2000

28 道垣內 弘 人, "成年後見制度私案" (1076) : 1995

29 新井 誠, "成年後見制度の理念と實際" (575) : 2002

30 岡田伸太, "成年後見制度の運用の實情及び家庭裁判所と關係機關との連携" (1211) : 2001

31 法務省民事局參事官室, "成年後見制度の改正に關する要綱試案の槪要" (1141) : 1998

32 原 司, "成年後見制度の實務上の諸問題" (1211) : 2001

33 日本辯護士連合會, "成年後見制度に關する改善提言"

34 岡 村 美保子, "少子化ㆍ高齡化とその對策, 總合調査" 國立國會圖書館調査及び立法考査局 2005

35 "厚生勞動省 홈페이지, “痴?性高齡者の現狀”, 본문주소참조"

36 前田 泰, "判斷力の鑑定ㆍ診斷" (575) : 2002

37 "內閣府 홈페이지, “平成18年版 高齡社會白書”, 본문주소참조"

38 新井 誠, "任意後見制度の立法的必要性について" (1141) : 1998

39 原 司, "任意後見制度について" (1172) : 2000

40 田山輝明, "任意後見制度-ドイツにおける老齡配慮委任狀との比較" (1141) : 1998

41 阿部崇, "任意後見が擔う?自分自身?の意見決定 : 自らの生き方を託す人を自らの意思で" ニッセイ基礎硏究所 2005

42 安井 宏, "プリメ?ル民法Ⅰ(民法入門ㆍ總則)"

43 岡孝, "オ?ストリアにおける成年後見法の新たな展開" (972) : 1991

44 特輯, "Interview 成年後見制度と立法過程 : 星野英一先生に聞く" (1172) : 2000