제(第)3자(者)에 의한 채권침해(債權侵害)의 유형적(類型的) 고찰(考察)

김현선 ( Kim Hyeon-son ) 한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 2011 외법논집 Vol.35 No.4

The majority view on the infringement of obligation classify the types as infringement on the reversion of the obligation itself, infringement on the payment of the obligation’s purpose (i.e., both obligation is being extinguished and obligation is not being extinguished), and decrease debtor’s general assets. Above types are too ideological to know and can not reflect various dispute pattern in the real world, and the analysis of the category also is not sufficient for the recognition of torts. In addition, there are some arguments that the researcher drive a conclusion without sufficient examinations regarding the relativity of obligation, the honoring the debtor’s free will, the equal treatment of the creditor, the principles of free competition. In Japan, a new approach challenged in the 1980s induced more appropriate typology at the realistic transactions against traditional aspect and tried to expand the possibility of the infringement of obligation by the third person. In Korea, there are little appeared the marks of attempting to categorization of the claims but these testings were so comprehensive and no concrete study advanced. In order to overcome this point at issue, I suggest new classification of the obligation infringement considering expansion of the diverse contract relationships as well as many sided realistic agreements and included not only mere claims but also whole contractual interest for the grouping. Moreover, the future contractual relations were also incorporated in this proposal package. Accordingly, a subjective aspect of the third person within the types and requirements of the torts are argued and Korean court cases also covered in this work. Hopefully, this piece will contribute new understanding on the classification of the complex infringement of obligation to the practice and learned circles.

사례연구 : 임대차보증금반환채권의 가압류와임차주택의 양도 -대법원 2013. 1. 17. 선고, 2011다49523 전원합의체 판결을 중심으로-

김현선 ( Hyeon Son Kim ) 건국대학교 법학연구소 2014 一鑑法學 Vol.0 No.28

Article 3, section 4 of the Housing Lease Protection Act provides that “the provisions of Articles 575(1) and (3) and 578 of the Civil Act shall apply mutatis mutandis to cases where a house, an object of the lease under this Act, is the object of a sale or public auction.” The majority opinion and court judgment consider it as a reasonable succession provision under the law. Assignee being succeeded landlord’s entire rights and obligation by the lease contract with combined ownership of subjected house when leased house assigned. In this result, the assignee shall succeed without charge the refund claim of lease security deposit and assignor withdraw the relationship of lease contract and being discharged the obligation of refund claim of lease security deposit. In case, however, the leased house assigned with the refund claim of lease security deposit is attached even tenant’s claim which secured opposing power that is provided by the Housing Lease Protection Act, the issue is whether assignee succeeded third party debtors status in the attachment and whether creditor of the attachment can claim the effectiveness of attachment against assignee. If assignee succeed third party creditor of claim attachment position, she may unexpectedly get damage of double payment of lease security deposit means that assignee being repaid lease security deposit that already refunded to tenant to attachment creditor. On the other hand, assignee did not succeeded third party creditor status of claim attachment, attachment creditor may get disadvantage that she is being lost her rights of preferential payment from the proceeds for house in the auction procedure in the future. In case of the lease security deposit refunded to tenant without refund claim of lease security deposit is being attached, the assignee also have unknown these fact, according to the Housing Lease Protection Act, the owner of the leased house were changed, attachment creditor also regarded as unknown that she believe that the execution of the refund claim of lease security deposit were secured. Because the subject court judgment is related to the question of which opinion is more adequate to the jurisprudence with the formal conflicts of interest, we should carefully consider the purpose of Housing Lease Protection Act, legislative intent of the Act of article 3 section 4, characteristic of succession of subjects and interprets individually and concretely. Court holding accepts succession affirmative theory and stand that the effectiveness of attachment gave generic effect to the assignee who succeeded landlord’s status by the special article 3 section 4 of the Housing Lease Protection Act. By sentencing the exception of general effectiveness of claim attachment, court award possibility of protection for attachment creditor who attaching refund claim of lease security deposit that subject to the Housing Lease Protection Act.

동산·채권 등의 담보에 관한 법률상 채권담보권의 제문제

김현선(Kim, Hyeon-Son) 한국법이론실무학회 2013 법률실무연구 Vol.1 No.1

현재 시행되고 있는 동산·채권 등 담보에 관한 법률은 선진 각국의 법제 추세에 따라 중소기업 등이 동산과 채권 등을 이용하여 자금조달의 안정성과 실효성을 확보하는 등 기업활동의 편의를 제공하고자 도입되었다. 그런데 우리의 실정 및 현대 금융거래에 맞게 활용할 수 있도록 법제가 정비되었다고 단정할 수 없다. 왜냐하면 동산?채권 담보 제도를 이용하고자 하는 주요 목적과 국제적인 추세에 따르지 못한 동떨어진 조항들이 몇몇 산재되어 있기 때문이다. 즉 신용거래에서 최대한의 자산 가치 활용을 억제하는 결과를 초래할 수 있는 이용주체와 이용대상의 제한이다. 또한 채권담보권은 담보물권임에도 제3자에 대한 대항요건과 제3채무자에 대한 대항요건을 달리하여 규정한 관계로, 담보등기는 되어 있으나 제3채무자에 대한 대항요건을 구비하지 못한 경우, 제3채무자가 후순위권자에게 변제하여 선순위담보권자가 불측의 손해가 발생할 수 있다. 따라서 이해 당사자의 이익들 간의 균형과 명확하고 예측가능한 우선권규칙의 확립이 절실하다. 본고에서는 문제가 될 수 있는 조항들을 선진적인 각국의 제도와 비교?검토하여 차이점을 살펴보고, 적용에서 제기될 수 있는 몇 가지 문제를 검토하여 추후 법률개정시 도움을 주고자 한다.

타인의 불법행위로 태아가 사망한 경우 가해자의 민법상 책임여부

김현선(Kim, Hyeon-Son) 한국법학회 2013 법학연구 Vol.52 No.-

태아의 생명권을 헌법상 보호하고 있는 현재의 추이에 비추어 보면 태아의 보호는 지극히 당연하다. 그럼에도 불구하고 민·형사상 태아의 지위에 관하여 사람과 달리 취급하고 있어 헌법상 태아의 생명권은 빛을 잃고 있다. 즉 타인의 불법행위로 태아가 사망한 경우 생명권을 침해한 가해자는 오히려 면책되고, 태아가 경상을 입어 장애아로 출생하면 가해자는 책임을 면하지 못하는 모순된 입법제도를 취하고 있어 태아의 법적지위는 매우 불안정한 상태에 놓여 있다. 태아는 살아서 출생할 권리가 있고, 또한 형성 중의 인간으로서 생명을 보유하고 있으므로 국가는 태아를 위하여 각종 보호조치들을 마련해야 할 의무가 있다. 태아의 생명권보호와 현대의학의 발달 등으로 가해자에게 민법상 물질적·정신적 손해배상책임을 부담케 하는 것이 타당하다. 따라서 태아의 상속권을 가지는 부모는 정신적 손해배상 뿐만 아니라 물질적 손해배상까지 가해자로부터 책임을 물을 수 있도록 해야 한다. 이는 태아의 생명권을 헌법상 보호하는 시대에 부응하고, 태아를 사람과 같이 생명권을 인정하면서도 민·형사적 책임에서 사람과 다르게 해석할 명분도 근거도 없다. 또한 사람의 시기에 대해 민·형사상 책임에서 하나의 기준으로 통일하는 것이 일관성 있고, 정의의 관념이나 형평의 원칙에 부합하며, 각 법령해석상 마찰도 해소시킬 수 있기 때문이다. This article discusses the rights of living fetus to bring prenatal injury claims against their mothers for their physical or mental damage. This topic is uncertain at best and the courts that have wrestled with this issue have failed to create a consistent body of law. However, the question continues to appear and this growing trend of claims against mothers for actions taken while pregnant necessitates a thoughtful discussion of the benefits and consequences of imposing maternal liability. When deciding questions of liability for conduct committed by 3rd party, courts are faced with a choice between fetal and maternal rights. Because the law regarding fetal rights remains underdeveloped in comparison to other legal questions, courts are often faced with little or no guidance when making these decisions. The question of fetal personhood is not limited to criminal, tort or constitutional law alone. Rather, the developing nature of this field of legal theory creates a circumstance in which all fields of law are interwoven. After the wrongful death of a viable fetus was recognized as a cause of action in tort, several jurisdictions made the segue into criminal law by punishing crimes against viable fetuses. Therefore, as decisions may affect all areas of law, it is important that courts carefully consider the impact of their decisions. Fetal rights activists support the recognition of fetal rights as a benefit for society, promoting healthy babies and justice for children born with physical or mental damage due to the tortious acts of another. However, women’s rights activists put forth the argument that deciding questions of conflict between fetal rights and women’s rights is a zero-sum game, claiming that for every additional right held by unborn children, the liberty of the pregnant women who carry them is impeached. A study of the existing law in the area of fetal rights vs. maternal rights suggests that recognition of fetal rights may result in harm to the rights of women to such an extent as to outweigh any benefits from maintaining a cause of action for maternal prenatal torts. For reasons of personal autonomy and public policy, this article takes the position women should not be found liable to their children for prenatal injuries which result in physical or mental damage.

상가건물임대차보호법 시행령 개정안에 대한 의견

김현선(Kim, Hyeon-Son),원상철(Won, Sang-Chul) 한국법이론실무학회 2015 법률실무연구 Vol.3 No.2

The Commercial Building Lease Protection Act was amended on May 13, 2015. Accordingly, the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act Enforcement Decree is expected to enforce the terms of reference on November 14, 2015. The important issues of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act Enforcement Decree is the fixed date and the scope of the interested parties, information on the exceeding lease of change deposit etc. The Commercial Building Lease Protection Act was amended to be enforced the Enforcement Decree properly. The amendment of the law was to be recognized the opposing power about the exceeding lease of change deposit. Therefore the law need to provide the information on the lease in order to protect the third parties. Article 4 within article 2 paragraph 3 of the Commercial Building Lease Protection Act is not included it. If the Enforcement Decree provide that the lessees Registration is not need to provide reading. this can go beyond the bounds of delegated legislation. When it change the law in future, it should be taken into consideration. Also, An authoritative interpretation of the Ministry of Justice is in very limited scope of the interested parties. I think we should be broadened its scope. But the Justice Ministry decree still received the order of National Tax Service. And this is just looking to be perceived a wider range when it change the law in future.

나대지에 저당권을 설정한 후 저당목적물의 담보가치를 확보하기 위한 지상권의 효력

金炫先(Hyeon Son Kim) 중앙법학회 2012 中央法學 Vol.14 No.3

Generally creditor wanted to secure the easement that are not paid rent in addition to the provisional registration that is established for the claim of registration of transfer of title or the mortgage that is set on the vacant lot for the collateral of the loan. This is so called "collateral-easement", "coexistent-easement", or "contractual-easement for the security." The main reason of establishment of collateral-easement is to prevent from constructing the building on the vacant lot and to stem from decreasing the collateral value. The characteristic of the collateral-easement is not only non-possess the land but also not using the land by the easement holder, However, the easement which is provided on the article 279 of the Korean Civil Code, on the contrary, the easement holder have the right of using the subject land (i.e., res) as well as possession of the lot is the essence of the regulations. Therefore, some special easement that are not expect by the Civil Code was appeared and which is the right of collateral-easement that has not using the land and it is against the principle of the right of realty (i.e., jus in re) only created by the statute and thus questions concerning the establishment and effect of the easement are valid automatically arises. This is the key factor of the interpretation of the issue is whether collateral-easement is valid as a question how harmonize the protection of interest between the mortgagee and mortgagor. So this piece argued the question whether collateral-easement is new right of realty that are not expect by the Civil Code through the court decision and the dispute of academic theory, In addition, this article present the solution regarding the way of protection of land-mortgagee upon the current statute and court holding even she did not acquire the collateral-easement.

부동산명의신탁의 유형에 따른처분행위와 사해행위 -대법원 2013. 9. 12. 선고 2011다89903판결을 중심으로-

김현선 ( Hyeon Son Kim ) 건국대학교 법학연구소 2016 一鑑法學 Vol.0 No.33

부동산명의신탁 또는 사해행위 중 어느 하나의 법률행위만 있는 경우라면 각각 법리에비추어 판단해도 좋을 것이지만, 그렇지 않아도 복잡한 명의신탁과 사해행위취소 법리에비추어 두 개의 법률행위가 함께 일어난다면 법조인의 입장에서 골머리를 앓을 수밖에 없다고 토로하는 것을 보면, 간단한 문제로 보여지지 않는다. 더구나 강제집행을 면하기 위해채무자의 재산은닉과 처분은 점차 고도화되어 가고 있는 실정이고, 그에 맞서 채권자의 사전적 법적조치 또한 신속하게 이루어지는 등 두 사람간의 다툼은 그야말로 점입가경이다. 위 두 법리가 충돌한 경우 전형적인 이익충돌로 어느 견해를 선택하는 것이 법체계에 더부합하느냐에 관한 문제이기 때문에 그 해결방법에 있어서 어느 방법을 취하든 비판은 감내해야 한다. 더구나 이에 대한 상세한 국내문헌이 존재하지 않은 바, 필자는 부동산명의신탁 이후 사해행위가 발생한 경우 ``부동산실명법 자체로 해결하는 방법``과 ``부동산명의신탁법리와 사해행위 법리의 혼용으로 해결하는 방법`` 두 가지를 제안하고, 이 사건 대상판결과 달리 전자의 방법으로 해결하였다. 또한 부동산명의신탁 약정 자체가 사해행위가 되어부동산명의신탁법리와 사해행위 법리가 동시에 발생한 경우도 위 두 가지 방법 이외 ``사해행위법리 자체로 해결하는 방법``을 추가하여 문제를 해결하였다. 따라서 부동산을 명의신탁 한 경우 이를 금지하고 있는 부동산실명법 자체로도 완벽하게 해결하지 못하고 제도·정책상 기형적으로 문제를 해결하고 있는 상황에서 굳이 사해행위 법리까지 끌어들여 복잡한 양상까지 만들 필요는 없으므로 법적조치에 있어서 부동산실명법 자체로 해결하는 방법이 현행법령에 가장 적합한 해석이라 할 수 있다. Lawyer may make a decision following the individual reasoning if there are one juristic act between the title registration of real property by a third party`s name and fraudulent act. It is quite trouble some if both acts happens at the same time reflecting very complicated legal reasoning of the title registration of real property by a third party`s name and cancellation of fraudulent act. Many lawyers speak`s their mind is nothing for it to such a headache. Therefore it is not simple question in the legal field. Moreover, a situation that concealment and disposal of the debtor`s property is becoming increasingly sophisticated to escape an enforcement, and proactive quarrels among the creditors of the legal action also quickly made against him, the conflicts between them are really accelerated. Because the issue is which one is more consistent with the legal framework concerning whether they choose to view on the conflicts of interest as a typical case of the above two conflicting jurisprudence which way is to take any criticism in its resolution must endure. Moreover, the detailed national literature does not exist, I argue, as an author, if one may encounters the fraudulent act after registration of real property by a third party`s name, how to solve a mix of the registration of real property by a third party`s name. I insist that unlike the judicial ruling, the registration of real property by a third party`s name can be solved by the act of substantial named registration and the combination both act of substantial named registration and reasoning of fraudulent act. In addition, if the real estate trust agreement conduct itself had been occurred while the registration of real property by a third party`s name becoming the fraudulent act and both legal reasoning happened at the same time, I added another way to solve the issue of fraudulent act itself. Therefore, the registration of real property by a third party`s name is banned by the act of substantial named registration is not completely solved and currently government take action against this issue in the policy and system basis. It is a problem deformed legal action. So we should not choose the way to resolve itself by reasoning of the real estate title registration by a third party`s name. I strongly believe that the best choice of legal action is the way to resolve itself by applying the real estate real name registration act may be the most appropriate interpretation of the current laws and regulations.

제3자의 채권침해로 인한 구제수단

김현선(Kim, Hyeon-Son) 한국법이론실무학회 2013 법률실무연구 Vol.1 No.2

제3자의 채권침해에 의하여 불법행위가 성립하는 경우 그 효과로서 사후적인 구제방법인 손해배상청구 여부에 대해서는 논란이 거의 종식되었다고 할 수 있다. 그리고 사전적 구제방법으로 물권과 달리 상대권인 채권을 침해하는 경우에도 채권에 기하여 방해배제청구를 인정할 수 있는가? 앞의 논제와 함께 오랫동안 논의되어 왔지만 대항력이 인정되지 아니한 채권에 대하여는 인정되지 않는다는 것이 현재의 통설과 판례의 일관된 태도이다. 또한 민사집행법상 임시지위를 정하기 위한 가처분으로 사전적?예방적 조치를 할 수 있는데 우리나라 판례는 아직 법적근거가 없다고 하여 부정하고 있는 실정이다. 그렇다면 불법행위법에 기인하는 사전적?예방적 구제수단인 금지청구권을 생각해 볼 수 있을 것이다. 이에 대하여 명문의 규정이 없어도 긍정하는 견해가 다수이다. 또한 제3자의 채권침해도 금지청구권을 인정하면서 무한정 인정할 수 있느냐에 대하여는 약간의 다툼이 있지만, 금지청구권의 궁극적인 목적, 각 나라의 입법례와 판례의 동향, 신청사건에 있어서 법관의 자유재량성, 금지청구권의 행사에 따른 신의칙 위반 또는 권리남용에 의한 통제 등을 감안한다면 제한없이 인정하는 것이 타당하다. In case the tort is established by the claim infringement by third party, the arguments that whether creditor’s compensation for damages are asked for the ex-post remedies, is almost cleared. As an ex-ante remedy, the claim for removal of disturbance, a relative right of claim unlike property right, can be recognized in the case of claim is invaded. As of current court opinion and scholarly dogma coincidently alleged that the claim for removal of disturbance is not allowed in the right of claim because it is not recognized countervailing even it is discussed with former digress. In addition, precautionary and preliminary injunction to make temporary status under the civil execution act can be taken but Korean court did not accept this action by the reason of no legal ground. If it is so, the injunction that is precautionary and preliminary remedy which arising from tort law may be imaginable. For this possibility, majority opinion affirmed this allegation even statute is not provided, and the claim infringement by third party is also acknowledged. Only, a little argument aroused concerning whether such an argument is approved unlimitedly under the affirmation. The ultimate goal of the right of prohibition, each nation’s trend of court decision and legislation case, judge’s discretion in motion case, violation of good faith exercising of the right of prohibition or considering the control of abuse of rights, there is no need to admit these right because even if unlimitedly allowed this right of legal ground, it will not be a big issue.

분업적 의료행위에 대한 민사책임제한으로서 신뢰원칙의 적용 여부 -대법원 2011. 07. 14. 선고 2009다65416 판결을 중심으로-

김현선 ( Kim Hyeon-son ) 한국의료법학회 2013 한국의료법학회지 Vol.21 No.2

대상판결은 질적 수준이 같은 의료기관 간의 의료행위에 있어서 특히 선행 의료기관에서 조직 재검사 등을 한 경우 후속 의료기관에서 재차 조직검사 등을 실시할 주의의무를 어디까지 인정할 것인지와 관련하여, 동일한 제3차 의료기관의 판단을 신뢰한 서울대병원 의사에게 진단상의 주의의무 위반을 인정할 수 없다고 판시한데 의의가 있지만, 추후 상당한 논란이 예상된다. 더 나아가 후속 의료기관에서 재차 조직검사 등을 실시할 주의의무의 여부와 결부하여 신뢰의 원칙 적용 여부를 논의할 수 있는 계기를 마련하였다는 점에 있어서 우리에게 적지 않은 시사점을 안겨 주었다. 또한 현재의 판례의 경향이 각자 맡은 분야에서 의사로서 요구되는 주의의무 즉, 개개 의사가 자신이 분담한 영역에서 진료상 요구되는 주의의무를 다하였는지 뿐만 아니라, 분업화된 의료행위에 있어 필수적으로 요구되는 환자와의 의사소통과 협력의 의무를 다하였는지도 충분히 고려하여, 각 과목의 의사들에 대한 주의의무를 보다 세분화하려는 점에 있어서 매우 고무적이다. 그렇다면 대상판결과 같이 재차 조직검사 등 주의의무의 문제와 관련하여 머지않아 장래에 다시 판단이 있을 것으로 사료된다. 따라서 한번 조직 검사 등을 한 경우 재차 조직검사 등을 실시할 주의의무가 없다는 관행에 치우치는 것보다 의료관행은 의사의 주의의무를 상쇄시키지 않는다는 점과 환자의 재검사에 대한 의사표시와 진의파악 즉 환자의 의사소통과 협력, 질병의 경중, 구체적인 증상이나 상황, 처치시기의 긴급성, 재검사 등의 방법 및 재검사 등의 여부에 대한 설명의무 등 제반 사정에 비추어 선행 의료기관의 신뢰여부를 결정한다면 의료분업화에 따른 역기능은 다소 완화 될 것으로 본다. Clinical practice of psychiatric liaison with physicians is the first step for an early treatment of patient. Screening patients, carrying out intervention, and referring them to psychiatric specialists are running smoothly by the cooperation of member of the general hospitals. This association is being conducted by managers constituted of doctors, nurses, and medical social workers and the meeting is held every case at district general hospitals to achieve three objectives; (i) evoking a sense of responsibility for patients in the mind of general hospital staffs, (ii) developing a network for psychiatric liaison with physicians to care patients of their disease, and (iii) keeping up activities of the association. Through case conference of surgery and full accounts of the experiences given by recovered patients or their families, meeting attendants know patients’ distress, families’ sorrow, and their delight brought by the recovery, and are motivated to assist patients with disease. Thus, “spirit to spirit” is a keyword to develop a network of the cooperative medical care for supporting patients with disease. Referral of patients to other hospital or physicians is promoted by a reliable, faithful, and face to face relationship between physicians and other hospital or physicians. Physicians’ learning the skill for early intervention in disease is followed by an increase in referral of patients to other hospital or physicians, and which suggests the importance of providing teaching and training of medical care for disease to medical staffs including doctors of emergency care units, orthopedics, obstetrics, and dentistry. Therefore, systematic tools for screening former examination in general practice and for referring patients to other hospital or physicians after brief intervention are needed to be prepared under the leadership of a learned society. Popularizing the skill of brief intervention in general medical practice is also indispensable for advising patients about changing their abstinence. The subject case of this study will bring great teaching point into academic society, legal field, and medical arena.

주제별 논단 : 기타 ; 예금주가 사망한 경우 상속예금에 대한 법률관계 -공동상속인 1인이 자기 법정상속지분만큼 단독청구할 수 있는지 여부-

김현선 ( Hyeon Son Kim ) 한국금융법학회 2012 金融法硏究 Vol.9 No.2

Currently, financial institution requires entire identifiable heirs should be made a claim about the deposit bequeathed when account holder died in case one of coheirs seeks a payment. At this time the financial institution`s general practice is not accept the single claim without payment consent from other coheirs. There is a question whether this of reject the payment claim by the putting one coheir`s Because savings deposit will be succeeded separately by the share to heirs at the time bequeath started and each heirs is expects that they can be succeeded their share amount individually others with its own share The transfer of the rights and obligation by the inheritance succeeded to the heirs at the same time the death of the predecessor and decided by the division of the estate of inheritance. However, the issue arises when the estate is not divided. To solve this issue, someone have nothing to do but set the reversion of the inheritance estate until the estate is divided from the commencement of inheritance. Korean Civil Code provided that the predecessor`s rights and obligation shall be succeeded by the heritance share of the heirs, Civil Code Art. 1007, the estate must be subject to the common to the heirs until division, Civil Code Art. 1006, In addition, divisible claim within the joint estate inheritance, especially in the case of monetary claim, there is big difference between the theory of tenancy and common share regarding how the estate shall be reversed, and the academic perspectives also conflicts within the former dogma. Moreover, court holding is inconsistent in its ruling and judgment. Consequently, in this article I proposed how the financial institutions may escape their liability of default on the obligation of the retum the deposit , estate inheritance, when the deposit bequeathed to coheirs while account holder died and one of coheirs seek a payment with statutory inheritance share.