RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    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
    KCI등재후보

    우리나라의 부동산 선매제도에 관한 연구 = A Study on Korean Real Estate Preemptive Rights System

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76469494

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
      • URL 복사
    • 오류접수
    인용문이 복사되었습니다.

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      1. CONTENTS<BR>  (1) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES<BR>  Real estate preemption has become one system for carrying out<BR>  important land policies on public and private laws. However, the positive law in Korea has not yet acknowledged a preemptive right, but has only a preemptive consultation right, that is, a right with which a public agency can talk over the preferential purchase of the land concerned. Thus, I will explore the comparative law problems about the system and the nature, reality and future tasks of Korean preemption system.<BR>  (2) RESEARCH METHOD<BR>  Korea much lacks studies on real estate preemptive rights system. This study, therefore, focused on one thesis for a doctorate and ten academic theses about the system, analyzed the literature about it, and described its theoretical system in comparison with Korean systems related to preemption. Thus, this study began with an investigation on a comparative law in Chapter 2, explored preemptive rights in Germany in Chapter 3 and Korean systems related to preemption in Chapters 4 and 5, and described future tasks and concluded in Chapters 6 and 7.<BR>  (3) RESEARCH RESULTS<BR>  From the perspective on a comparative law, it will be said that German bonding preemption system has different legal, institutional, and structural system from Korean real estate preemptive consultation right.<BR>  2. RESULTS<BR>  Korean civil law does not have any regulations about preemptive rights and the preemptive consultation rights cannot be compared with the preemptive rights in German civil law. Korea will rely on the method of provisional registration for the preferential acquisition of a particular thing in the future. It can also examine the regulations about the preemptive rights that those with surface rights, those with lease rights, and those with hire rights can purchase the thing preferentially at the sale price when the owner wants to sell it. From the viewpoint of comparative jurisprudence, German preemptive system will be said to have different legal institutional structural system from that of Korean preemptive consultation rights system.<BR>  It is necessary to improve the preemptive consultation system by means of Korean "Law on the Planning and Use of National Land". Above all, the requirements for preemptive consultation should be improved. For example, a land owner tries to settle surface or lease rights for the third party. When one with preemptive consultation rights wants to purchase it, I think, he should consult about the purchase and sale.<BR>  Though land preemptive consultation rights need to be acknowledged for a public purpose, it is essential to protect the rights of a land owner. Rather, it will be said to be desirable to have a public agency enter into preemptive consultation insofar as a land owner wants to purchase an0d sell it.
    번역하기

      1. CONTENTS<BR>  (1) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES<BR>  Real estate preemption has become one system for carrying out<BR>  important land policies on public and private laws. However, the positive law ...

      1. CONTENTS<BR>  (1) RESEARCH OBJECTIVES<BR>  Real estate preemption has become one system for carrying out<BR>  important land policies on public and private laws. However, the positive law in Korea has not yet acknowledged a preemptive right, but has only a preemptive consultation right, that is, a right with which a public agency can talk over the preferential purchase of the land concerned. Thus, I will explore the comparative law problems about the system and the nature, reality and future tasks of Korean preemption system.<BR>  (2) RESEARCH METHOD<BR>  Korea much lacks studies on real estate preemptive rights system. This study, therefore, focused on one thesis for a doctorate and ten academic theses about the system, analyzed the literature about it, and described its theoretical system in comparison with Korean systems related to preemption. Thus, this study began with an investigation on a comparative law in Chapter 2, explored preemptive rights in Germany in Chapter 3 and Korean systems related to preemption in Chapters 4 and 5, and described future tasks and concluded in Chapters 6 and 7.<BR>  (3) RESEARCH RESULTS<BR>  From the perspective on a comparative law, it will be said that German bonding preemption system has different legal, institutional, and structural system from Korean real estate preemptive consultation right.<BR>  2. RESULTS<BR>  Korean civil law does not have any regulations about preemptive rights and the preemptive consultation rights cannot be compared with the preemptive rights in German civil law. Korea will rely on the method of provisional registration for the preferential acquisition of a particular thing in the future. It can also examine the regulations about the preemptive rights that those with surface rights, those with lease rights, and those with hire rights can purchase the thing preferentially at the sale price when the owner wants to sell it. From the viewpoint of comparative jurisprudence, German preemptive system will be said to have different legal institutional structural system from that of Korean preemptive consultation rights system.<BR>  It is necessary to improve the preemptive consultation system by means of Korean "Law on the Planning and Use of National Land". Above all, the requirements for preemptive consultation should be improved. For example, a land owner tries to settle surface or lease rights for the third party. When one with preemptive consultation rights wants to purchase it, I think, he should consult about the purchase and sale.<BR>  Though land preemptive consultation rights need to be acknowledged for a public purpose, it is essential to protect the rights of a land owner. Rather, it will be said to be desirable to have a public agency enter into preemptive consultation insofar as a land owner wants to purchase an0d sell it.

    더보기

    목차 (Table of Contents)

    • ABSTRACT
      Ⅰ. 序論
      Ⅱ. 先買에 관한 比較法的 考察
      Ⅲ. 獨逸에서의 土地先買權
      Ⅳ. 우리나라에서의 先買權 關聯 制度
      Ⅴ. 우리나라에서의 土地先買協議權
      Ⅵ. 우리나라 先買制度의 限界 및 向後課題
      Ⅶ. 結論
      參考文獻
    • ABSTRACT
      Ⅰ. 序論
      Ⅱ. 先買에 관한 比較法的 考察
      Ⅲ. 獨逸에서의 土地先買權
      Ⅳ. 우리나라에서의 先買權 關聯 制度
      Ⅴ. 우리나라에서의 土地先買協議權
      Ⅵ. 우리나라 先買制度의 限界 및 向後課題
      Ⅶ. 結論
      參考文獻
    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 "프랑스의 토지선매제도" 81-7, 1981

    2 "토지선매협의권에 관한 법리" 법원사 1995.

    3 "토지선매제도의 발전방향" 88-6, 1988

    4 "일본의 토지선매제도" 92-, 1989

    5 "선매권에 관한 연구" 2002.

    6 "서독의 선매권 제도에 관한 고찰" 1983.

    7 "독일에 있어서의 토지입법" 1971.7

    8 "도시공영개발사업에 관한 고찰" 여수대학교 1998.

    1 "프랑스의 토지선매제도" 81-7, 1981

    2 "토지선매협의권에 관한 법리" 법원사 1995.

    3 "토지선매제도의 발전방향" 88-6, 1988

    4 "일본의 토지선매제도" 92-, 1989

    5 "선매권에 관한 연구" 2002.

    6 "서독의 선매권 제도에 관한 고찰" 1983.

    7 "독일에 있어서의 토지입법" 1971.7

    8 "도시공영개발사업에 관한 고찰" 여수대학교 1998.

    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
    2023 평가 계속평가 신청대상 (계속평가)
    2021-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    2019-12-01 등재 등재후보 탈락 (계속평가)
    2018-12-01 등재 등재후보로 하락 (계속평가) KCI등재후보
    2015-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2011-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) KCI등재
    2009-01-01 등재 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) KCI등재
    2006-01-01 등재 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2005-01-01 등재 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2003-01-01 등재 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 2.61 2.61 1.87
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    1.49 1.25 0.704 0.38
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼