http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
강동인,강병근 대한건축학회 2000 대한건축학회 학술발표대회 논문집 - 계획계/구조계 Vol.20 No.1
The purpose of this study is to find the biblical and historical origin of church towers and the theoretical base of the church louvers by seeing the alteration of e in the addle ages. The results of this. study wee as follows; ① The shape of the tabernacle and temple was not fated to be influenced by the style of spire; ② Functional bell tower was found after the approval of Christianity by Rome(AD313). After that, the shape that rose high in the sky was found because many cites in the Gothic ages e in the height of the tower; ③ It is hard to find that form of the Tower of Babel and obelisk directly had effect on building in the muddle ages but the style was found in towers and spires.
강동호 경상대학교 경남문화연구소 1979 慶南文化硏究 Vol.2 No.1
A tort is not always composed of by the act of only one man but may be made up of by the act of several persons, which is called $quot;cotort$quot; and is prescribed in Article 760 of the Civil Code. Here in this provision are included three kinds of types. In this study, through the survey of the judicial precedents of two countries Korea and Japan, and by the reconsideration and the comparison of the contentions of theories, the development of the concept of the cotort has been made .an attempt centering around Article 760 of the Civil Code. As a result, the conclusions acquired from several important points at issue are as follows: A) It is considered that joint cognition-subjective joint one-is required as the requisite for organizing the cotort in a narrow sense. As compared with ther differences between Paragraph Ⅰ & Ⅱ of this Article, the way of the above-mentioned interpretation of this Article is found to be reasonable, and it is based on the consideration that the cotort cannot be consisted of between an intentional person and a negligent one. B) The joint liability imposed on the doer of the cotort is regarded not as unreal joint debt but as real joint one. It is because Article 760 of the Civil Code must be esteemed according to the context of it, and because the substantial balance among the debtors has to be kept. C) In our Civil Code, the distinction between the cotort in a narrow sense and the cotort done by unknown injurer is interpreted in a different way from the former Japanese Civil Code and the majority of theories. The establishment of the cotort corresponds to Paragraph Ⅰ of the Article 760 exclusively in case the doers have the subjective joint correlation, and in case the act has the objective joint correlation only, Paragraph Ⅱ. D) In case there is a cotort done by unknown injurers, it seems that, one of them who demonstrated that his act did not result in the damage, should be free from the joint debt.