친일재산의 토지를 취득한 선의의 제3자 = The Bona-Fide Third Party`s Acquisition of a Plot of Land which is Pro-Japanese Collaborators` Property

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The State may nationalize pro-Japanese collaborators` property which pro-Japanese and anti-national collaborators acquired during the Japanese colonial rule of Korea pursuant to “the Special Act on Asset Confiscation of Pro-Japanese and Anti-national Collaborators to the State (hereinafter referred to as “the Special Act”)” enacted and enforced on December 29 2005. However the proviso to Article 3 (1) of the Special Act stipulates that “the right of the third party who acquires in good-faith or in return for adequate consideration can not be harmed.” Therefore in case where the descendants of pro-Japanese and anti-national collaborators sell a plot of land which is pro-Japanese collaborators` property to the bona-fide third party that plot of land can not be redeemed by the State in order to protect the third party who acquired it in good faith. However the state may redeem the sales price that the descendant received from the third party as unjust enrichment. The Civil Code of Korea does not acknowledge the bona-fide acquisition of real estate since it does not adopt the principle of credibility of real estate. Nonetheless the proviso to Article 3 (1) of the Special Act acknowledged the bona-fide acquisition of real estate. This thesis compares and analyzes the system of the German Civil Code which acknowledged the bona-fide acquisition of real estate and the provision of the Special Act of Korea. Article 892 of the German Civil Code requires for the bona-fide acquisition of real estate the following elements such as acquisition by legal transaction good-faith acquisition from a person who does not have a right inaccuracy of the Land Registry no objection and etc. On the other hand the proviso to Article 3 (1) of the Special Act of Korea requires the elements of bona-fide the third party acquisition payment of adequate consideration and etc. Through the comparison of the above two systems this thesis purports to point out the necessity for the adoption of a bona-fide acquisition of real estate by the Civil Code of our country and the issues arising from the system of bona-fide acquisition of real estate under the Special Act.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김상용, "不動産登記의 公信力과 不動産物權의 善意取得에 관한 韓·獨比較" 법학연구원 18 (18): 1-48, 2008

2 이영준, "한국민법론[물권편] 신정2판" 박영사 2004

3 친일반민족행위자재산조사위원회, "친일재산에서 역사를 배우다" 리북 2010

4 이승우, "친일반민족행위자재산의 국가귀속" 5.18연구소 9 (9): 177-207, 2009

5 서경환, "친일반민족행위자재산 국가귀속결정의 법적 성격 및 제3자의 보호범위" 법원도서관 (78) : 2008

6 김계순, "친일반민족행위자 후손의 토지 소송에 관한 판례유형" 법학연구소 14 (14): 1-36, 2010

7 법제사법위원회, "친일반민족행위자 재산의 환수에 관한 특별법안 검토보고" 법제사법위원회 2005

8 이재덕, "친일반민족행위자 재산의 국고귀속 및 관련소송" 서울고등검찰청 13 : 2009

9 장석천, "중국 물권법상 부동산의 선의취득에 대한 고찰" 한국재산법학회 25 (25): 77-102, 2008

10 김성욱, "일제강점기 반민족행위자의 재산환수" 한국토지법학회 23 (23): 315-340, 2007

11 송덕수, "신민법강의 제2판" 박영사 2009

12 이은영, "부동산의 선의취득이 인정되는 경우" 국가고시학회 1997

13 이부훈, "부동산의 선의취득" 한국토지법학회 (16) : 2000

14 강태원, "부동산등기의 공신력에 관한 일고찰" 연세대학교 법학연구소 1 : 1990

15 김판기, "부동산등기의 공신력 인정에 관한 실천적 재론" 국가고시학회 2008

16 이근식, "부동산등기와 공신력" 국가고시학회 1975

17 곽윤직, "민법주해[ⅩⅤⅡ], 채권(10)" 박영사 2005

18 김학동, "물권법 제9판" 박영사 1998

19 곽윤직, "물권법 제7판" 박영사 2003

20 곽윤직, "물권법 제7판" 박영사 2003

21 이은영, "물권법 제4판" 박영사 2006

22 김상용, "물권법 전정판증보" 법문사 2003

23 이상태, "물권법 3정판" 법원사 2002

24 안태근, "등기원인증서의 공증과 등기의 공신력" 법조협회 54 (54): 92-143, 2005

25 Schellhammer, "Sachenrecht nach Anspruchsgrundlagen samt Wohnungseigentungs und Grundbuchrecht" 3 : 2009

26 Eckert, "Sachenrecht" 4 : 2005

27 Bauer, Sturner, "Sachenrecht" 17 : 1999

28 Wolf, Wellenhofer, "Sachenrecht" 1 : 2010

29 Münchkomm, "Münchener Kommentar Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch, Band 6, Sachenrecht, 854-1296, 5. Aufl"