RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
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
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      기여분을 둘러싼 제문제  :  부양기여분법제 = Several Problem on The Contributory System

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A82692454

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      In principle, Korean Civil Law follows equitable inheritance practices in case of joint inheritance. On the other hand, it has contributory portion system in Article 1008-2 to realize substantial fairness, to avoid perfunctory fairness. One of the criticisms that have been raised since the latter of 1990s in relation to the contributory portion system is that the operation of the system aimed at substantial fairness in portion is not so efficient in reality because the provisions regarding the system are too strict. Furthermore, since it is difficult for a contributing heir/heiress to predict whether or not he/she will acquire a contributory portion and how much he/she will acquire for it, his/her status is not stable. Accordingly, under the current legal system that does not specify detailed requirements for contributor portions and calculation methods, it is necessary to objectively define the requirements and calculation criteria of contributor portions for the predictability of acquisition of inheritance by coheirs and for the stability of their status. This study categorizes since contributory portion is an element of revision of inheritance portions in the division of inherited property, it is limited to coheirs who are entitled to the division of inherited property. As a result, in the event that the spouse and one child are coheirs, those who are a second-ranked lineal ascendant or third-ranked sibling are not entitled to claiming contributory portion even though they made special contribution to the inherited property. Accordingly, it is required to legislate provisions so as to recognize such contributions.
      번역하기

      In principle, Korean Civil Law follows equitable inheritance practices in case of joint inheritance. On the other hand, it has contributory portion system in Article 1008-2 to realize substantial fairness, to avoid perfunctory fairness. One of the cri...

      In principle, Korean Civil Law follows equitable inheritance practices in case of joint inheritance. On the other hand, it has contributory portion system in Article 1008-2 to realize substantial fairness, to avoid perfunctory fairness. One of the criticisms that have been raised since the latter of 1990s in relation to the contributory portion system is that the operation of the system aimed at substantial fairness in portion is not so efficient in reality because the provisions regarding the system are too strict. Furthermore, since it is difficult for a contributing heir/heiress to predict whether or not he/she will acquire a contributory portion and how much he/she will acquire for it, his/her status is not stable. Accordingly, under the current legal system that does not specify detailed requirements for contributor portions and calculation methods, it is necessary to objectively define the requirements and calculation criteria of contributor portions for the predictability of acquisition of inheritance by coheirs and for the stability of their status. This study categorizes since contributory portion is an element of revision of inheritance portions in the division of inherited property, it is limited to coheirs who are entitled to the division of inherited property. As a result, in the event that the spouse and one child are coheirs, those who are a second-ranked lineal ascendant or third-ranked sibling are not entitled to claiming contributory portion even though they made special contribution to the inherited property. Accordingly, it is required to legislate provisions so as to recognize such contributions.

      더보기

      목차 (Table of Contents)

      • Ⅰ.서론 1
      • 1.부양기여분제도의 의의 1
      • Ⅱ.부양의 유형 3
      • 1.특별한 부양 3
      • 1)법률상 부양의무의 이행인지의 여부 3
      • Ⅰ.서론 1
      • 1.부양기여분제도의 의의 1
      • Ⅱ.부양의 유형 3
      • 1.특별한 부양 3
      • 1)법률상 부양의무의 이행인지의 여부 3
      • 2)노부모 부양과 특별 부양의 관계 4
      • 3)특별한 부양과 피상속인의 재산유지 및 증가여부 5
      • 2.며느리의 요양보호 6
      • Ⅲ.부양기여분 법제의 실효성과 한계 7
      • 1.부양의무불이행에 따른 재산상속상 제재규정이 불비 7
      • 2.유언 내지 유증을 통한 부양과 그 한계 8
      • 3.현행 부양기여분의 한계 8
      • Ⅳ.부양상속법제와 부양기여분법제의 비교 9
      • 1.양자의 유사성 9
      • 2.양자의 차이점 10
      • 1)요거상 10
      • 2)확정성 11
      • Ⅴ.결론 11
      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

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼