中間省略登記

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

'Intermediate - Registration - omitted Registration' means the case that, though B bought A 'real property and sold it to C, C registered himself as owner in the Register-book as if C acquired the ownership of it directly from A. Such a registration is very usual in the real world of dealing and has been much disputed about in the theories and the judicial precedents.
The contents of this thesis are ; I. Introduction, II. The meaning of 'Intermediate-Registration - omitted Registration', III. The validity of 'Intermediate-Registration - omitted Registration', IV. 'Registration - claim of the last buyer for the first seller', V. Conclusion.
I. Introduction
In this chapter, firstly, the present writer refers to the motive and the aim which he selects this theme. Secondly, he arranges and analyzes the points which is disputed about in the theories and the judicial precedents. Thirdly, he describes why this problem has arisen. Lastly, he inspects closely the real world of dealing and classifies the ways of 'Intermediate - Registration - omitted Registration' as the four types.
II. The meaning of 'Intermediate - Registration - omitted Registration'
The reason the meaning of it is disputed about is found in the fact that the present Korean Civil Code has adopted the German system (Eintragungssystem) with regard to the transfer of real rights, whereas the old Civil Code followed the French System (Vertragssystem). Therefore, in this chapter, the present writer arranges, criticizes and synthesizes the theories and the judicial precedents of Korea and the foreign countries (esp., Japan and Germany) according to the legislative principles (i.e., the German system and the French system).
III. The Validity of 'Intermediate - Registration - omitted Registration'
In this chapter, discussed is the case that 'Intermediate - Registration - omitted Registration' is already completed, distinguished from 'the Registration - claim of the last buyer for the first seller' under the state that 'Intermediate - Registration - omitted Registration' is not completed.
Firstly, the present writer surveys 'the change in Real Rights over Immovables' under the two Legislative principles.
Secondly, he arranges and analyzes the theories and the judicial precedents about the validity of 'Intermediate - Registration - omitted Registration', its basis and its condition under the French system (the Japanese Civil Code and the old Korean Civil Code). And he also arranges, analyzes and criticizes the theories and the judicial precedents under the German system (BGB and the present Korean Civil Code). Lastly he presents a new theory about them.
IV. The Registration - claim of the last buyer for the first seller
In this chapter, preferentially, the present writer surveys the source and the nature of the Registration - claim in the Japanese Civil Code, BGB and the present Korean Civil Code. Next, he arranges and the judicial precedents of Japan and Korea. The majority of the theories and the judicial precedents recognize 'the Registration - claim of the last buyer for the first seller' under a certain condition or through a certain theory - formation. But he criticizes them and denies 'the Registration - claim of the last buyer for the first seller', because the source of it can not be found in the legal relation of the first seller and the last buyer. And he thinks that it is appropriate to deny it, considering the more performance of the German system (Eintragungssystem) which the present Korean Civil code has adopted.
V. Conclusion
In each chapter, the present writer expresses his own opinion. It is peculiar to him that, distinguishing 'the Registration - claim of the last buyer for the first seller' form the validity of 'Intermediate - Registration - omitted Registration' which is already completed, he recognizes the latter but denies the former. In this chapter, he synthesizes his opinions which is expressed in each chapter, and he refers to problems awaiting solution (esp., problems of Korean Real Estate Registration Act).

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 목차
• I. 序論 = 1
• A. 拔題의 動機 및 目的 = 1
• B. 中間省略登記에 있어서의 問題點 = 2
• C. 中間省略登記가 行하여지는 理由 = 4
• D. 去來의 實際 및 類型 = 7
• II. 中間 省略登記의 意義 = 13
• A. 意思主義의 경우 = 13
• 1. 舊民法의 경우 = 13
• 2. 日本民法의 경우 = 17
• B. 形式主義의 경우 = 17
• 1. 獨逸의 경우 = 17
• 2. 現行民法의 경우 = 18
• 3. 結語 = 22
• III. 中間省略登記의 效力 = 25
• A. 不動産物權變動의 槪觀 = 25
• 1. 立法主意 = 26
• 2. 形式主義下의 不動物權變動 = 27
• B. 이미 經了된 中間省略登記의 有效性 = 30
• 1. 意思主義下의 論議 = 30
• 가. 日本의 學說 및 判例 = 31
• (1) 學說 = 31
• (가) 無效說 = 31
• (나) 有效說 = 33
• (다) 有效要件으로서의 合意 또는 同意 = 37
• (2) 判例 = 39
• 나. 우리 舊民法下의 論議 = 40
• 2. 形式主義下의 論議 = 41
• 가. 獨逸의 判例 및 學說 = 42
• (1) 判例 = 43
• (2) 學說 = 44
• (3) 檢討 = 46
• 나. 現行民法下의 學說 및 判例 = 46
• (1) 異說 = 47
• (2) 有效說 = 48
• (가) 論據 = 48
• (나) 有效要件으로서의 合意 또는 同意 = 51
• (3) 判例 = 54
• (가) 論據 = 56
• (나) 有效要件으로서의 合意 또는 同意 = 57
• (4) 結語 = 58
• IV. 最終買受人의 最初賣渡人에 대한 登記請求權 = 62
• A. 登記請求權의 發生原因 및 性質 = 62
• 1. 日本의 경우 = 62
• 2. 獨逸의 경우 = 63
• 3. 우리나라의 경우 = 63
• B. 中間省略登記請求權 = 65
• 1. 日本의 學說 및 判例 = 65
• 가. 學說 = 65
• 나. 判例 = 67
• 2. 우리나라의 學說 및 判例 = 67
• 가. 學說 및 檢討 = 67
• (1) 合意를 要한다는 見解 = 68
• (2) 合意를 要하지 않는다는 見解 = 69
• 나. 判例의 態度 및 檢討 = 76
• 다. 結語 = 78
• V. 結論 = 81
• 參考文獻 = 85
• 英文要約 = 89