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
    KCI등재

    집합건물의 구분소유자의 대지 공유자에 대한 방해배제청구-대법원 2024. 10. 31. 선고 2024다202317 판결 = Ejectment Action against Co-owner of the Land filed by a Sectional Owner of Condominium Building- Supreme Court of Korea, Decision 2024Da202317, October 31, 2024

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A109895846

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

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

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    This paper examines the validity of the Supreme Court Decision 2024Da202317, rendered on October 31, 2024, focusing on two major issues: the legal relationship between unit owners and land co-owners who are not unit owners, and the boundary between alteration and management of co-owned property.
    First, while the application of the Civil Act's co-ownership principles to the relationship between unit owners and non-unit landowners is appropriate, the internal relations among unit owners should be governed by the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings. This layered interpretation allows the management body of the aggregate building to have legal standing in related disputes, which is crucial for the efficient management of the building.
    Second, the recent Supreme Court ruling offers clear criteria for distinguishing between alteration and management of co-owned property. However, ambiguity remains—for example, regarding the interpretation of "lawfully constructed" buildings—and there is concern that the ruling's legal standards may be overly generalized in future cases. Based on this awareness, this paper analyzes specific case examples and proposes directions for future interpretation and legislative improvement.
    번역하기

    This paper examines the validity of the Supreme Court Decision 2024Da202317, rendered on October 31, 2024, focusing on two major issues: the legal relationship between unit owners and land co-owners who are not unit owners, and the boundary between al...

    This paper examines the validity of the Supreme Court Decision 2024Da202317, rendered on October 31, 2024, focusing on two major issues: the legal relationship between unit owners and land co-owners who are not unit owners, and the boundary between alteration and management of co-owned property.
    First, while the application of the Civil Act's co-ownership principles to the relationship between unit owners and non-unit landowners is appropriate, the internal relations among unit owners should be governed by the Act on the Ownership and Management of Aggregate Buildings. This layered interpretation allows the management body of the aggregate building to have legal standing in related disputes, which is crucial for the efficient management of the building.
    Second, the recent Supreme Court ruling offers clear criteria for distinguishing between alteration and management of co-owned property. However, ambiguity remains—for example, regarding the interpretation of "lawfully constructed" buildings—and there is concern that the ruling's legal standards may be overly generalized in future cases. Based on this awareness, this paper analyzes specific case examples and proposes directions for future interpretation and legislative improvement.

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    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

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼