http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
법인 아닌 사단과 총유 규정의 고찰 - 공동체 정신과 관련하여 -
이달순 전북대학교 부설법학연구소 2023 법학연구 Vol.72 No.-
Research on the regulations of collective ownership in our academia has tended to supplement Professor Kim Jeung-han’s theory and system or criticized it. It has made breakthroughs in academia and practice, however, it is necessary to explore the ideological foundations behind the collective ownership regulations. In this article, the meaning or existence of the collective ownership regulations is reviewed, focusing on the legislator's opinion or the purpose of the law on the basis of legal ideology. In particular, the relationship between values or spirits pursued by unincorporated associations as commons is studied from its own legal and philosophical perspective. The following summary is the conclusions of reviewing the conventional discussions on collective ownership regulations with the perspective of liberalism and communitarianism. First, it is necessary to consider the meaning of the collective ownership regulations in the circumstances and historical trends at the time of the enactment of the Civil Act. We cannot underestimate the ideological basis of liberalism and communitarianism. It is also necessary to reinterpret whether the collective ownership regulations will still be suitable for regulating the future situation in line with the public's legal consciousness. Second, the collective ownership regulations, one of the characteristics of Korean civil law, should be handled carefully and judged by comprehensively considering the characteristics of various and numerous unincorporated associations that exist in our society. Third, the characteristics by each type of unincorporated association should be considered and it is necessary to discuss the value or spirit of the commons, which is the establishing purpose of unincorporated association. We should proceed with academic development in the spirit of “Gain new knowledge by reviewing old things”
블랙컨슈머의 하자 주장에 대한 매도인의 권리 보호 - 하자담보책임과 소송상의 대응방안을 중심으로 -
이달순 경북대학교 법학연구원 2023 법학논고 Vol.- No.83
우리 민법은 계약관계에 있는 당사자, 예컨대 소비자와 사업자 간의 문제에 관하여 채무불이행책임을 규정하면서도 하자담보책임을 별도로 규정하고 있다. 종래 우리 학계에서의 하자담보책임 연구는 매수인의 권리 보호에 초점을 맞추어 이론 및 체계를 보완하여 왔다. 그런데 정작 하자가 존재하는지의 판단 문제에 있어서 매도인의 권리 보호에는 소홀히 한 점을 부정하기 어렵다. 따라서 물건 하자의 개념과 함께 실무상 하자가 어떻게 다루어지는지 하자의 판단기준을 살펴보고 계약부적합 개념과의 관계에 관하여 유럽소비재매매지침을 본 후 국제물품매매계약에 관한 유엔협약(CISG)를 정리하였으며, 민법 제580조, 제581조, 상사매매의 특칙 관련 상법 제69조를 고찰하였다. 특히 물건에 하자가 없음에도 억지 주장으로 과도한 보상을 요구하는 등 이른바 악성소비자 내지 블랙컨슈머와 같이 부당한 소송을 통하여 불법적 이득을 꾀하는 소비자는 생산품의 품질 향상과는 무관하여 중소기업의 발전을 저해하는 요인이 되기도 한다. 이러한 악덕 소비자나 합리적인 이유 없이 하자를 주장하고 부당한 횡포를 부리는 기업에 대한 사업자의 법적 대응방향에 관하여 면밀한 검토가 필요하므로 이를 논하고자 한다. The Korean Civil Law stipulates liability for non-performance of contract obligation between consumers and sellers, while separately stipulating warranty liability. Academic research on warranty liability has supplemented theories and systems so far, focusing on protecting the rights of buyers. However, the protection of the seller's rights was neglected in the matter of defect judgement. This study reviewed the concept and judgement standards of defect, Directive 1999/44/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 25 May 1999 on Certain Aspects of the Sale of Consumer Goods and Associated Guarantees and the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods(CISG) on the Relationship with the Concept of Non-Conformity of Contracts and articles 580 and 581 of the Civil Law and 69 of the Commercial Act related to special rules on commercial trading. In particular, consumers who seek illegal gains through unfair lawsuits, such as malicious consumers or black consumers who demand excessive compensation with forced claims even though there is no defect in the product, are also a factor that hinders the development of SMEs regardless of the quality improvement of their products. It studies the legal response methods of business operators to these evil consumers or companies which claim defects and engage in unfair tyranny without a rational reason.