만명소품 관계 주요저술 판본고

이제우 중국학연구회 1994 中國學硏究 Vol.9 No.-

러시아연방 민법전의 전면개정 -기본원칙과 관습법을 중심으로-

이제우,명순구 법조협회 2014 法曹 Vol.63 No.8

Currently the Russian Parliament is embarking on a complete refrom of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation. Several parts of the Civil Code has already been amended among which include articles stipulating the principle of good faith, the principle of the prohibition of the abuse of rights and customary law. This signifies that there has been a major shift in the approach towards the fundamental principles and the sources of civil law in Russia. The ongoing amendment process is critical in that the comprehensive revision of the Civil Code may point to the end of the long transition phase in Russia from civil law based on the legacy of Socialist law to one founded explicitly on the freedom of market and the autonomy of individuals. The current amendment is also essential in readjusting the crucial balance between legal stability and judicial justice in Russian civil law. The present article studies inter alia the reasons for the previous absence of the principle of good faith in the Civil Code of the Russian Federation, how the principle of the prohibition of the abuse of rights was applied and interpreted in Russian civil law, why customary law was only partially recognized up until now. Given that the particularities of modern Russian civil law can still be attributed to the legacy of Socialist law much attention is given to the doctrine and case law of the Soviet era. Research on how the principle of good faith, the principle of the prohibition of the abuse of rights and customary law were developed in Soviet law reveals that socialist ideology and legal thinking were the critical factors that decided their nature and scope of application. Even after the Civil Code of the Russian Federation was adopted in the mid-1990s norms stipulating the above practically remained intact. However the need for their revision became evident as legal relations became more complex and reflected values other than those that existed in the past. Hence the current amendment is focused on addressing these problems. Also, the article provides an assessment of the current amendment along with comments on the prospects of future development in the realm of civil law in Russia.

중국어 수사법의 학습과 교육

이제우 중국어문논역학회 2004 中國語文論譯叢刊 Vol.12 No.-

Legal Challenges in Uniformly Regulating Administrative Mediation in Korea

이제우 한국집합건물법학회 2021 집합건물법학 Vol.37 No.-

There is no overarching framework for the regulation of administrative mediation in Korea. The ever–growing number of mediation bodies is increasingly creating a dizzying landscape that defies coherent and uniform regulation, which in turn is leading to a considerable degree of unforeseeability and uncertainty. Admittedly the path towards introducing a legislative act that can uniformly govern administrative mediation is full of challenges. However many of these challenges may be reduced significantly by limiting the scope of application of uniform legislation, by excluding court-annexed mediation, and preferably also private mediation. By solely targeting the regulation of administrative mediation, the legislative act can focus on the special nature and particularities of administrative mediation in Korea. Also, whatever approach is taken towards the uniform regulation of administrative mediation, the key to success will lie in legislative minimalism. Legislation should almost exclusively focus on preserving the voluntary nature and flexibility of the institution of mediation. With the exception of a few essentials, everything else may and should be separately regulated by the relevant legislative acts that also constitute the basis of the individual administrative mediation bodies. Aside from this, mediation should maintain its defining trait as a consensus-based method of dispute resolution. Elements that run counter to the voluntariness of mediation should be reduced to a minimum. The initiation and completion of mediation should in principle be the result of the explicit expression of the parties’ intention to that effect, with possibly recognizing a slight compromise in respect of initiating mediation. Also, it is desirable to recognize the legal effect of a mediation agreement as a settlement agreement (compromise) under the Civil Code, and not a settlement in court. Based on this, a mediation agreement should as a rule be unenforceable, unless there is explicit agreement by the disputing parties as to its enforceability.

우리 민사법상 위험책임에서의 손해배상범위에 관한 비판적 고찰

이제우 한국민사법학회 2015 民事法學 Vol.70 No.-

In modern tort law fault-based liability and strict liability (or more specifically Gefährdungshaftung) enjoy equal status. However that is not the case in Korean tort law since the Korean Civil Code was enacted under the overwhelming influence of the principle of fault liability. The fact that numerous special acts regulating strict liability outside the Civil Code also lack theoretical strictness does little to rectify the situation. Therefore it is necessary to reinforce the theoretical foundations of the institute of strict liability in Korean tort law. First, Art. 763 of the Korean Civil Code should be amended. Currently it applies Art. 393 which is a provision on determining the scope of compensation for damage caused in contractual relations. Since Art. 393 stipulates that damage must have been foreseen or was foreseeable in order to be compensable it contradicts the nature of strict liability. Strict liability is, by definition, imposed regardless of whether there is fault or not, and yet the application of Art. 393 would effectively result in requiring fault in order to hold the tortfeasor liable. Second, the introduction of liability caps on the amount of compensation should be considered as a possible means of limiting strict liability. Also, it would be well advised to exclude foreseeability among the various circumstances that are considered in applying the theory of adequate causation. Otherwise the scope of compensation would depend on the attributes of the tortfeasor and not the nature and extent of danger. Third, applying a theory of comparative negligence in strict liability results in comparing negligence on the part of the victim and the tortfeasor. This contradicts the essence of strict liability. Instead, a theory of comparative danger may be considered. According to this approach it is the degree to which the victim and the tortfeasor contribute to danger that should be subject to comparison. Fourth, special acts regulating strict liability in Korea leave much to be desired with regard to stipulating liability for dangerousness. Too many exceptions and restraints are introduced into relevant legal provisions making the scope of application of strict liability too narrow. Legal reasoning, not legal policy should form the foundation of enacting such acts.

明刊本 王納諫 編 《蘇長公小品》 연구― 晩明 시기 ‘小品’ 용어의 출현과 개념의 형성

이제우 중국어문논역학회 2019 中國語文論譯叢刊 Vol.0 No.44

Wang Najian in the Late Ming明 Dynasty period was the first to use the term ‘Xiaopin小品’ as the title of a literary anthology. He named the literary anthology written by Su Shi蘇軾, the great writer in the Song宋 Dynasty, which he had chosen in the context of ‘Xiaowen-Xiaoshuo小文小說’ aimed at personal pleasure value relative to ‘Chongrong-Dapian舂容大篇’ for the purpose of economic pragmatism. The concept of ‘Xiaopin’ first presented in 《Su Changgong-Xiaopin》 by Wang Najian was developed into a collection of distinct literary-oriented Xiaopin containing works of contemporary writers, and had a great impact on the Late Ming literary world until the end of the Ming Dynasty by striving to renovate archaism style. This thesis is a preliminary study of the demonstration of literary characteristics of Xiaopin in the Late Ming Dynasty, and is aimed at identifying the literary characteristics and style of 《Su Changgong-Xiaopin》 by Wang Najian, and its value and contribution to the development of the contemporary Xiaopin in the Late Ming Dynasty. 문학선집의 題名으로 ‘小品’이란 용어를 최초로 사용한 明人 王納諫(字 聖兪, 號 觀濤, 萬曆35年 進士)은 사회적 경세실용 목적의 ‘舂容大篇(典雅한 大作)’과 상대되는 개인적 쾌락가치 지향의 ‘小文小說’의 의미로 자신이 選評한 宋代 文豪 蘇軾의 문선집을 ‘小品’이라 명명했다. 이렇게 왕납간이 《蘇長公小品》에서 처음으로 제시한 ‘소품’ 관념은 이후 晩明 당대 작가의 작품을 수록한 특수한 문학취향의 각종 소품선집으로 계승 발전되어 당시의 의고주의 문풍을 쇄신하려는 새로운 문학창작의 시도로서 明朝가 막을 내릴 때까지 만명 문단에 큰 파장을 일으켰다. 본고는 만명소품 작품 성격의 규정에 대한 사전 연구로, ‘前人小品’으로서 왕납간 (편)의 《소장공소품》의 작품 성격과 풍격 특징, 만명에서의 효용과 가치 및 만명 당대 소품의 발전에 대한 영향과 공헌 등을 일별하는 데 목적을 둔다.

‘악의적이거나 현저히 상당성을 잃은 공격’과 민사상 명예훼손

이제우 한국민사법학회 2017 民事法學 Vol.78 No.-

The Supreme Court of Korea introduced the legal doctrine of ‘malicious or unduly vicious attacks’ in the law of defamation during the 2000s. This was a reflection of the change in attitude during the last two~three decades towards the freedom of speech in Korea. It also signified that the Korean law of defamation was developing in step with the relevant law of other jurisdictions, most notably that of the United States. As a result, the freedom of speech was afforded stronger protection in relation to defamation of public figures or matters of public concern. Since this is judge-made law, it is important to analyze case law regarding the balance between the protection of reputation and the freedom of speech. Despite the growing importance of such a topic there are very few, if any works on the doctrine of ‘malicious or unduly vicious attacks’. Given the practical and academic need for understanding the exact scope and nature of the doctrine, it is an area of law that merits extensive examination. 대법원은 표현의 자유에 대한 우리 사회의 태도 변화와 이 법익에 대한 보호가 강화되는 세계적 추세에 발맞춰 명예훼손법에서 ‘상당한 이유 법리’와 ‘악의적이거나 현저히 상당성을 잃은 공격 법리’(이하 악의성 법리)를 발전시켜왔다. 특히 대법원이 공인(공적 관심 사안)을 사인(사적 영역)과 구분하여 전자에 대해서 악의성 법리를 적용하는 것은 사회적으로 중대한 문제와 관련하여 정당이나 언론사 등의 정당한 감시와 비판 기능을 보호하고 표현의 자유에 대한 보장을 강화하기 위해서이다. 그런데 악의성 법리가 우리 판례에서 적용되어 온지 10년이 훨씬 넘었지만 아직 그 구체적인 내용과 관련해서 불명확한 점이 존재한다. 특히 우리 판례에서 악의성 요건이 기존의 상당성 요건과 항상 뚜렷하게 구별되지 않는 점은 아쉬움으로 남는다. 그러므로 명예훼손과 관련된 판례의 일관성을 위해서 악의성 법리의 내용, 그리고 더 나아가 악의성 법리와 상당한 이유 법리의 관계에 대한 명확한 입장 정리가 필요하다. 이밖에 우리 대법원이 악의성 법리를 도입하였던 취지를 더 확실하게 살리기 위해서는 피고가 사용한 표현의 방법이나 성격뿐만 아니라 사실 확인에 대해서 취했던 태도와 관련해서도 공인/사인 또는 공적 관심 사안/사적 영역을 구분하는 것이 바람직하다. 악의성 법리는 그대로 적용하면서도, 공인(공적 관심 사안)에 대해서는 상당성 요건의 입증책임을 완화하여 표현의 자유를 극대화하고 사인(사적 영역)에 대해서는 무거운 입증책임을 요구하여 명예의 보호를 최대한 보장한다면 우리 헌법은 물론 국민의 법감정에 더 부합하는 명예훼손법을 발전시킬 수 있을 것이다. 특히 최근 우리 사회에서 명예훼손을 이유로 법적 책임을 추궁하는 경우가 급격하게 늘고 있는 현실을 고려하면 공인(공적 관심 사안)과 관련해서 표현의 자유를 최대한 많이 보장하는 것이 앞으로 우리 명예훼손법이 지향해야 할 발전방향이라고 판단된다.

감독자책임의 성질과 미성년자의 책임능력 및 변제자력

이제우 경희대학교 법학연구소 2014 경희법학 Vol.49 No.3

There are three important aspects to the 2012 draft amendment to the Korean Civil Code. First, the delictual capacity of minors is no longer relevant in imposing liability on their guardians. Such an amendment addresses the non liquet issue of the current Civil Code. However the desirability of such a revision is questionable since it does not take into consideration the indirect nature of guardian liability and focuses merely on providing more protection to victims. It is necessary to have guardians liable despite the delictual capacity of minors, albeit in varying degrees depending on the latter. Secondly, the financial capacity of minors in the draft amendment remains irrelevant to compensating victims based on Art. 755 of the Korean Civil Code. The main reason for denying the recognition of such a factor was the fact that allowing compensation depending on the pecuniary circumstances of minors would make it difficult to justify the exemption of liability of their guardians. However this is not necessarily the case. Not only does considering the financial capacity of minors not always result in liability in equity in the strictest sense of the term, but the guardian's own negligence in supervising minors is not deprived of its legal meaning. Thirdly, a deeper understanding of the nature of guardian liability is crucial in determining the significance of the delictual and financial capacities of minors. While Korean doctrine and case law have either acknowledged or rejected the subsidiarity of guardian liability, the legal definition of subsidiary liability was never considered in earnest. However without a firm understanding of the concept it is impossible to comprehend the true nature of guardian liability. 2012년 민법개정시안에서 미성년자의 감독자책임규정과 관련하여 특기할만한 점으로는 세 가지를 들 수 있다. 첫째, 감독자책임의 성립에 있어 미성년자의 책임능력 요건이 배제됨에 따라 감독의무자는 책임능력과 무관하게 모든 미성년자에 대해서 책임을 지게 된다. 이는 현행법에서 존재하는 법의 흠결을 해소할 수 있지만 감독의무자가 부담하는 간접책임적 성격을 무시한 채 피해자의 보호만 염두에 둔 개정이기에 적절하지 않다. 모든 미성년자에 대해서 감독의무자의 책임을 인정하되 전자의 책임능력의 유무에 따라 후자가 지는 책임의 성격을 달리 할 필요가 있다. 둘째, 제755조상 감독자책임의 소극적 요건으로서 꾸준히 논의되어오던 미성년자의 변제자력 요건이 민법개정시안에 포함되지 않았다. 미성년자의 변제자력을 감독의무자가 지는 책임에 있어 고려하게 되면 전자의 경제사정에 따라 후자가 부당하게 면책된다는 것이 주된 이유였다. 그러나 이는 타당하지 않다. 미성년자의 변제자력 요건을 인정하는 것이 반드시 순수한 의미의 형평책임이 아닐 뿐만 아니라 감독의무를 게을리 하여 인정된 감독의무자 자신의 과실이 법적 의미를 상실하는 것도 아니기 때문이다. 셋째, 감독자책임에서 미성년자의 책임능력과 변제자력이 갖는 의미를 제대로 알기 위해서는 감독의무자가 지는 책임의 성격을 파악해야 한다. 우리나라에서는 그동안 학설과 판례가 감독자책임의 보충적 성격을 긍정하거나 부정만 했을 뿐 책임의 보충성 개념 자체에 대해서는 고민을 거의 하지 않았다. 그런데 책임의 보충성을 정확하게 이해하지 않고서는 미성년자와 감독의무자가 지는 책임의 성격을 파악할 수 없다. 그러므로 책임의 보충성 개념에 대한 정의가 선행되어야 한다.

Civil Liability for Damage Resulting from Sudden Unintended Acceleration (SUA) - A Critical Overview of Product Liability in Korea -

이제우 단국대학교 법학연구소 2024 법학논총 Vol.48 No.1

Zero. This is the total number of decisions delivered by the Supreme Court of the Republic of Korea in which civil liability for damage caused by alleged ‘sudden unintended acceleration (SUA)’ of motor vehicles was ever recognized in Korea. Interestingly, the Supreme Court has on various occasions recognized the civil liability of manufacturers for defects in products other than that of motor vehicles, and in 2017 a new provision was introduced into the Product Liability Act, resulting in the recognition of the presumption of a product’s defect, as well as the causal link between such a defect and damage. Despite this, it is still unrealistic for alleged SUA victims to make a successful product liability claim. Evidently, the innate technical complexity of motor vehicles and automotive engineering related to the potential causes of SUA makes any attempt to mitigate the victim’s burden of proof futile. It is critical to understand that damage caused by SUA and damage caused by defect in non-automobile products are far from similar, which in turn makes the natur e of p r oduct liability f or the t wo t ypes o f damage q uite d iffer ent. W ithout an appreciation for this disparity, the prospects for the product liability regime in Korea with regard to SUA is not bright. Fortunately, there are a number of interesting amendment bills that were discussed by the National Assembly last year. Among the many proposals found in these amendment bills, the transfer of the burden of proof (albeit limited to SUA-related cases) and the recognition of the manufacturer’s obligation to produce relevant data to the court (subject to the protection of trade secrets) seem to be the most promising. With regard to the latter, the recent amendment of the Automobile Management Act does not negate the importance and necessity of amending the PLA.

중국어 수사법의 학습과 교육

이제우 중국어문논역학회 2004 中國語文論譯叢刊 Vol.12 No.-