RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재후보

      별거와 이혼시 혼인주택이용에 관한 소고 = A Study on the Separation and Divorce of Right to Use of Matrimonial Residence

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76554215

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      The Korean agreement-divorce system in practice guarantees the utmost freedom to divorce since a couple can easily get the permission from the court to divorce on the basis of mutual agreement. As a result the welfare of children of divorcing parents and an economically vulnerable spouse is usually neglected to the fact that the consequence of divorce is not taken into a serious consideration. Matrimonial residence is the basis of family life. It is of particular importance to family members as compared with other properties. Even when the title to the residence belongs to one of the spouses, the other spouse`s interest to its use and maintenance remains the same. The living in the residence of the non-owner spouse and children have to be secured against an unilateral disposal by the owner spouse. However, in view of the property law dogma, the spouse who has the title thereto might wish to dispose of it in the market without any restriction like his other properties. The independence of the property law scheme from the family law system becomes more distinct when the parties are separated or divorced. With the breakdown of marriage, the right of co-occupancy of matrimonial residence is eliminated from the family law phase. However, §1361b BGB and Hausratsverordnung empower the judge to induce a lease on the former matrimonial residence between the parties, when the necessity for the continuance of living there is established. Thus, the non-owner spouse`s living in the residence after the breakdown of marriage is protected as a property right against a third party even if the title is transferred to him. In this case, the rent will have to be paid to the former spouse. Meanwhile, the issue of financial support to the separated or divorced spouse will be entrusted to the matrimonial property scheme and alimony-like maintenance. This way of treatment makes the use of the residence consistent with the property law system as well as with the family law idea. In Korea, the matrimonial residence is treated much the same as other properties. Sometimes, the court grants a lease of the former residence to a divorced spouse, but it is considered only as one of the measures in distributing the properties between the former spouses, hence as no more than an adjustment technique within the sphere of the family law. However, this function of a lease which makes it possible for the non-owner spouse to assert his occupancy against a third party should be treasured. As in Germany, it is important to give a more positive role to the lease as a matter of property law in regard to the residence in order to secure the place for a divorced spouse to live. This legal consequentiality will strengthen the real independence of a spouse and the well-being of accompanying children.
      번역하기

      The Korean agreement-divorce system in practice guarantees the utmost freedom to divorce since a couple can easily get the permission from the court to divorce on the basis of mutual agreement. As a result the welfare of children of divorcing parents ...

      The Korean agreement-divorce system in practice guarantees the utmost freedom to divorce since a couple can easily get the permission from the court to divorce on the basis of mutual agreement. As a result the welfare of children of divorcing parents and an economically vulnerable spouse is usually neglected to the fact that the consequence of divorce is not taken into a serious consideration. Matrimonial residence is the basis of family life. It is of particular importance to family members as compared with other properties. Even when the title to the residence belongs to one of the spouses, the other spouse`s interest to its use and maintenance remains the same. The living in the residence of the non-owner spouse and children have to be secured against an unilateral disposal by the owner spouse. However, in view of the property law dogma, the spouse who has the title thereto might wish to dispose of it in the market without any restriction like his other properties. The independence of the property law scheme from the family law system becomes more distinct when the parties are separated or divorced. With the breakdown of marriage, the right of co-occupancy of matrimonial residence is eliminated from the family law phase. However, §1361b BGB and Hausratsverordnung empower the judge to induce a lease on the former matrimonial residence between the parties, when the necessity for the continuance of living there is established. Thus, the non-owner spouse`s living in the residence after the breakdown of marriage is protected as a property right against a third party even if the title is transferred to him. In this case, the rent will have to be paid to the former spouse. Meanwhile, the issue of financial support to the separated or divorced spouse will be entrusted to the matrimonial property scheme and alimony-like maintenance. This way of treatment makes the use of the residence consistent with the property law system as well as with the family law idea. In Korea, the matrimonial residence is treated much the same as other properties. Sometimes, the court grants a lease of the former residence to a divorced spouse, but it is considered only as one of the measures in distributing the properties between the former spouses, hence as no more than an adjustment technique within the sphere of the family law. However, this function of a lease which makes it possible for the non-owner spouse to assert his occupancy against a third party should be treasured. As in Germany, it is important to give a more positive role to the lease as a matter of property law in regard to the residence in order to secure the place for a divorced spouse to live. This legal consequentiality will strengthen the real independence of a spouse and the well-being of accompanying children.

      더보기

      참고문헌 (Reference)

      1 本沢巳代子, "離婚給付の研究" 一粒社 1998

      2 ともみ, "離婚後の婚姻住居利用問題への対処(3・完)-ドイツ家具令(HausratsVO)の沿革を拠り所にして-" 中央大学 102 (102): 1996

      3 右近健男, "離婚․別居と婚姻住居-ドイツ法の紹介" 岡山大學 46 (46): 1997

      4 常岡史子, "一方配偶者の有する不動産の処分の制限-ドイツ法における議論を中心として" 113 (113): 1996

      5 Gernhuber, "Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch, Band 7, 3. Aufl." 1993

      6 Staudinger, "Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuche für das deutsche Reihe nebst Einführungsgesetz, Band 4" 1899

      7 Staudinger, "Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen, Familienrecht, 12. Aufl." 1993

      8 Roth, "Juris PraxisKommentar BGB., Band 4, Familienrecht, 2. Aufl" Juris 2005

      9 Erman, "Handkommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz, Verbraucherkreditgesetz, Gesetz zur Regelung der Miethöhe, Produkthaftungsgesetz, Haustürwiderrufsgesetz, AGB-Gesetz, Erbbaurechtsverordnung, Wohnungseigentumsgesetz, Schiffsrechtegesetz, Ehegesetz, Hausratsverordnung, Beurkundungsgesetz(teilkommentiert), Band 2, 9. Aufl." 1993

      10 Soergel, "Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen, Band 8, 12. Aufl" 1987

      1 本沢巳代子, "離婚給付の研究" 一粒社 1998

      2 ともみ, "離婚後の婚姻住居利用問題への対処(3・完)-ドイツ家具令(HausratsVO)の沿革を拠り所にして-" 中央大学 102 (102): 1996

      3 右近健男, "離婚․別居と婚姻住居-ドイツ法の紹介" 岡山大學 46 (46): 1997

      4 常岡史子, "一方配偶者の有する不動産の処分の制限-ドイツ法における議論を中心として" 113 (113): 1996

      5 Gernhuber, "Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch, Band 7, 3. Aufl." 1993

      6 Staudinger, "Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuche für das deutsche Reihe nebst Einführungsgesetz, Band 4" 1899

      7 Staudinger, "Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen, Familienrecht, 12. Aufl." 1993

      8 Roth, "Juris PraxisKommentar BGB., Band 4, Familienrecht, 2. Aufl" Juris 2005

      9 Erman, "Handkommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz, Verbraucherkreditgesetz, Gesetz zur Regelung der Miethöhe, Produkthaftungsgesetz, Haustürwiderrufsgesetz, AGB-Gesetz, Erbbaurechtsverordnung, Wohnungseigentumsgesetz, Schiffsrechtegesetz, Ehegesetz, Hausratsverordnung, Beurkundungsgesetz(teilkommentiert), Band 2, 9. Aufl." 1993

      10 Soergel, "Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen, Band 8, 12. Aufl" 1987

      11 Palandt, "Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz (Auszug), Gesetz zur Regelung des Rechts der Allgemeinen Geschäftsbedingungen, Verbraucherkreditgesetz, Gesetz über den Widerruf von Haustürgeschäften und ähnlichen Geschäften, Gesetz zur Regelung der Miethöhe (Art. 3 des2. WKSchG), Produkthaftungsgesetz, Erbbaurechtsverordnung, Wohnungseigentumsgesetz, Ehegesetz, Hausratsverordnung, Band 7, 56. Aufl" 1997

      12 Soergel, "Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch mit Einfüh-rungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen, Band 7, 12. Aufl" 1988

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

      학술지 이력

      학술지 이력
      연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
      2026 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
      2020-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
      2017-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
      2013-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
      2012-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2011-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2010-06-17 학회명변경 영문명 : 미등록 -> The Institute for Legal Studies KCI등재후보
      2010-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보2차) KCI등재후보
      2009-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2008-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보2차) KCI등재후보
      2007-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
      2005-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
      더보기

      학술지 인용정보

      학술지 인용정보
      기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
      2016 0.78 0.78 0.74
      KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
      0.75 0.76 0.82 0.14
      더보기

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼