不動産의 物權變動과 登記와의 關係에 관한 硏究 : 登記의 公信力을 中心으로

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

It is true that there is no any "offentlichen Glaube" of the Registration in our Civil Code including its Registrations. At the same tims, its "de lege late" is not availble either. The Korean Scholars are mostly argreeing with admitting the "öffentlichen Glaube" of the Registration as a "de lege ferenda".
It is true that there have been a lot of arguements of admitting the "öffentlichen Glaube" legally. Especially at the time when the present Civil Code was established, there were many arguements of approval or disapproval of adopting the "Eintragungsprinzip."
One of the important reasons of disapproval of it was due to that the Bill of Civil Code adopted the "Eintragungsprinzip" while they did not admit the" "öffentlichen Glaube" of the Registration.
Even though the "öffentliehen Glaube" and the "Eintragungsprinzip" are intimately related each other, the "Eintragungsprinaip" does not inevitably, acquire the "öffentlichen Glaube" of the Registration.
Also the "Vertragsprinzip" will be able to admit the "offentlichen Glaube." The principle of public faith in transaction of Immovables is on the premise of the existence of the principle of public Announcement, and it is a same point that there are the system of public announcement of the Registration either on the "Eintragungsprinzip" or on the "Vertragsprinzip."
However, there is a mere defference on the validity of the Registration. There is not a logical or an inevitable relationship between the "Eintragungsprinzip" and the principle of public faith.
Not only we can vest the "öffentlichen Glaube" to the Registration under the "Vertragaprinzip" of construction the basic principles, but we can do so under the "Vertragsprinzip."
The Registration as a system of public announcement of transfer of Immovables roots in an adeed of the modern law to make the transaction of the Immovables quickly, safetly, and securely.
In order to realize such an ideal, the principle of public a announcement is especially emphasized in the legal systems of every Country in the world. The principle of public faith is to protect the people who believe in the Registration.
Meanwhile the principle of public faith salls far a safe transaction and for Registration. Because of this fact, However, the truly previleged persons' profits may be infringed. So the important way of to solving the problem depends upon the condition whether the safety of transactions is taken serious view or the truly privileged persons' profits are done so.
If admitting the "öffendlichen Glaube" an economicalconditions must be established to protect the safety of transactions, even if truly previleged persons words be infringed.
In Korea, because of not admitting the "öffentlichen Glaube" for the Registration, the transactions of Immovables are often infringed from thire safety. As an example of Jung-Gog Dong case, Seoul, Korea.
The majar reason of this infringed event is due to the dispproval of the "öffentlichen Glaube." Because of this fact, the rights of property of the people are infringed, and legal purpose of the Rights protection in faced on lack of its full function.
An Unwilling damage of the Jung Gog Dong inhabitant is not thire own suffer, but all the social one.
Here the systematic establishment to admit the "öffentlichen Glaube" is inevitably acquired.
This study is to explore way to protect the people from such an Unhappiness, and to provide a precautionary measures and postcautionary ones.
1. Precautionary measures.
First : Accomplishment of the principle of the public Announcement.
Second : Granting practical investigation rights the public officials the Registration.
Third : Governmental Contracts and establishment of financial. assurance system of the brokers of Immovables.
Fourth : Unification of the Cadastral and the Registration Book.
Fifth : Arrangement of the Registration Book.
Sixth : Rational management of the Cadastral system.
Seventh: Adoption of the Examination of Title.
2. Postcautionary Jaeasures
First : Objection System of disposal of the public officials of Registration
Second: Compensations System for Damage
Consequently, it is not so easy to admit the "öffentlichen Glaube" for the Registration Books in Korea.
Today the safe transaction of Immovables are truly acquired. Now it is a very important legislative policy whether to admit the "öffentlichen Glaube" of Registration, or not.
In order to solve this problem, a social invironmented construction must be preceded, and it is one of the problems to be solved in the future.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 目次 = 1
• I. 序論 = 5
• II. 不動産物權의 變動 = 10
• 1. 動産, 不動産의 區別의 基礎 = 10
• (1) 不動産의 價値와 作用 = 10
• (2) 不動産의 社會性과 公共性 = 12
• (3) 土地와 建物의 區別 = 14
• 2. 不動産物權變動 = 15
• (1) 物權行爲 = 15
• 가. 物權行爲의 意義 = 15
• 나. 物權行爲의 方式과 內容 = 18
• 다. 物權的合意의 拘束力 = 23
• 라. 物權行爲에 있어서 法律行爲에 관한 一般原則 適用 = 26
• (2) 不動産物權變動에 관한 立法主義 = 27
• 가. 槪說 = 27
• 나. 意思主義와 形式主義 = 29
• 다. 兩主義에 대한 批判 = 33
• (3) 民法 第 186 條의 原則 = 34
• III. 不動産物權變動과 登記 = 40
• 1. 槪說 = 40
• (1) 序說 = 40
• (2) 獨逸의 學說 = 41
• (3) 우리나라의 學說 = 42
• (4) 批判 = 46
• 2. 登記의 效力 = 48
• (1) 登記의 一般的인 效力 = 48
• 가. 權利變動的 效力 = 48
• 나. 對抗要件으로서의 效力 = 49
• 다. 順位確定的 效力 = 49
• 라. 登記의 占有的 效力 = 50
• 마. 登記의 그 밖의 附隨的 效力 = 50
• (2) 假登記의 效力 = 54
• 가. 本登記順位保全의 效力 (本登記 후의 效力) = 54
• 나. 本登記前의 假登記의 效力 = 55
• Ⅳ. 公信의 原則 = 57
• 1. 問題의 提起 = 57
• 2. 公信의 原則을 設定할 必要性 = 60
• 3. 外國의 立法例 = 66
• (1) 佛蘭西 = 66
• (2) 獨逸 = 75
• (3) 瑞西 = 79
• (4) 英 · 美 = 81
• 4. 公信力 認定을 위한 外國의 制度 = 86
• (1) 序說 = 86
• (2) 豫防的措置 = 87
• 가. 台帳의 整備 = 87
• 나. 登記公務員의 審査權 = 88
• 다. 權利分析制度 = 93
• 라. 異議의 登記制度 = 96
• (3) 事後的 救濟制度 = 97
• 5. 우리나라에 있어서의 公信力 問題 = 99
• (1) 國內學者들의 見解 = 99
• (2) 社會經濟的인 構造面 = 103
• (3) 豫防的 措置問題 = 106
• 가. 公示의 原則 문제 = 106
• 나. 登記公務員의 審査權問題 = 107
• 다. 改正不動産登記法 문제 = 110
• 라. 地籍制度 문제 = 113
• 마. 台帳과 登記簿와의 一元化 문제 = 116
• 바. 登記簿 整備 = 120
• 사. 不動産權利分析制度의 도입 = 120
• 아. 不動産去來仲介法(案)에 있어서의 仲介業者의 財政保證制度 = 121
• (4) 事後救濟措置 문제 = 125
• 가. 登記公務員의 處分에 대한 異議 = 125
• 나. 損害賠償制度 = 128
• Ⅴ. 結論 = 130