중국 부부재산제에 관한 고찰 -2011년 중국 혼인법 사법해석(3)에 대한 분석을 중심으로-

김로륜 ( Ro Ryun Kim ) 단국대학교 법학연구소 2011 법학논총 Vol.35 No.2

Marital property system, a system of concerning one country`s problems of couple`s property ownership, it includes a series of problems such as property ownership premarital and marital, settlement of obligations, segmentation of property at the end of marriage. It has changed variously on the system of marital property of China since 1950, when China`s first marriage law was promulgate. the marriage law in 1950 clearly accreditated general marital property system. But the regulations is too simple, it couldn`t adjust to the complex judicial practice. The marriage law in 1980 changed general marital property system into common property system in married life, and introduced the couple` Contractual Property System, when regulations were quite brief in Contractual Property System. Traditional marriage view and values had changed gradually since the market economic system was established and western capitalist values were introduced into China in 1990s. In this context, the female`s social status improved, economic income increased gradually, and the divorce rate also increased. China`s marriage law was modified in 2001, establishing the current marital property system included with legal property system and Contractual Property System. But there were only 3 regulations concerning the marital property system in the marriage law, recapitulatory and simple. It could`t solve complex marriage dispute. So the Supreme People`s Court established the Interpretation(the 1st)of the Marriage Law of P. R. C in 2001 and the Interpretation (the 2nd) of the Marriage Law of P. R. C in 2003. It has become a focus about the protection of personal property in marriage with the increase of the personal property of the citizen in our county. Especially according to the marriage conception of Chinese people, real estate in an essential element of marriage, so the disputes of property are becoming more and more. the Interpretation(the 3rd) of the marriage Law of P.R.C was established and took effect on Augest 13, 2011, in this context. In the Interpretation(the 3rd) of the Marriage Law of P. R. C the regulations about property filled up more than half of the whole judicial interpretation. Fist, it regulates that the fructus in marriage and unearned in crement of private property doesn`t belong to marital Property. Second, it regulates the problems of the property right of the house which is bought by both of the parents. Third, it regulates the problems of the property right of the house purchased by premarital mortgage individually. Fourth, in regulates the effect of the house owned by the couple but disposed by either. Finally, it also regulates the right of claim of property division of the couple during the marrage existing period. There exist some defect on logicality and unity though the interpretation of marriage law perfects the curren law on some sides. This thesis mainly in troduces China`s marital property system according to the related regulations in the Interpretation(the 3rd) of the Marriage Law of P. R. C.

헌법상 혼인의 보호와 주택세제

백제흠 한국지방세학회 2020 지방세논집 Vol.7 No.3

Amidst the grave situation where marriage and family life is in jeopardy due to rise in non-marriage and low birth rates, this article evaluates the taxation system for housing, which is the living foundation for marriage and family life, and suggests improvement measures in terms of the constitutional protection of marriage. Marriage protection under the Constitution is a basic right, composed of right to liberty, right to equality, social rights and institutional security. The right to liberty and equality in terms of marriage protection under the Constitution is subject to strict constitutional review based on the principle of proportionality and is protected from unjust infringement by the state; whereas the principle of prohibition of excessive restriction is applied for the social rights aspect of the protection of marriage. Further, in order to ensure marriage and family life, active financial support by the state is required. In terms of tax law, marriage protection under the Constitution firstly requires the prohibition of discriminatory taxation for married couples, and active support by tax expenditure on marriage is further desired. Housing is subject to taxation at the stage of acquisition, possession, and transfer. The current housing tax system defines a family community formed by marriage as a household, and gives tax benefits to a household owning a single house while imposing heavy tax burden on owners of multiple houses. Such current household-oriented housing tax system, where tax exemption and heavy taxation is determined based one house per one household regime, gives both married couples and couples about to be married, compared to unmarried people or couples in de facto marriages, an incentive to deviate from marriage and attempt to reduce the tax burden. This is due to the fact that unlike unmarried people who are subject to tax benefits even if they each own a house, married couples can only receive tax reduction for a single house as a couple and bear a heavy tax burden for owning multiple houses. This violates the constitutional protection of marriage by discriminating against married communities in favor of unmarried people or couples in de facto marriage and by violating free decision making for marriage. As a measure to improve such household-oriented housing tax system in light of the constitutional protection of marriage, it is necessary to change the taxation unit from an individual unit system to a married unit system. For the married unit system, tax benefits should be granted to one house per person for a married couple in taxing the acquisition, possession and transfer of a house and thereby removing the discriminatory tax burden for marriages. Alternatively, even if the household-oriented system is maintained, it is reasonable to grant tax benefits to two houses for the constitutional protection of marriage, thereby allowing a similar outcome to the married unit system. The individual housing tax system should also be reorganized so as to constitutionally protect marriage by eliminating unconstitutional elements regarding additional residency requirements for special long-term holding deductions and the application of the 12% gift and acquisition tax rate for gifts between married couples. Such improvement plan for the housing tax system not only prevents violations of the right to freedom and equality to ensure constitutional protection of marriage, but also actively guarantees the protection of marriage as a social right in the era of non-marriage and low birth rates. 본 논문에서는 비혼과 저출산으로 혼인과 가족생활이 위협받고 있는 상황에서 헌법상 혼인의 보호의 관점에서 혼인과 가족 생활의 터전이 되는 주택에 대한 과세제도를 평가하고이에 대한 문제점 및 개선방안을 제시하였다. 헌법상 혼인의 보호는 기본권으로서 자유권과평등권 및 사회권의 성격과 제도보장의 성격을 가지고 있고 기본권으로서의 자유권과 평등권에 대하여 비례원칙에 의한 엄격한 위헌심사가 이루어지고 있으며 사회권으로서 혼인의보호에 관하여는 혼인과 가족생활을 보장하기 위한 국가의 적극적인 재정지원이 요청된다. 주택은 취득, 보유 및 양도의 단계에서 과세가 되는데, 현행 주택세제는 혼인으로 구성되는가족공동체를 세대로 규정한 다음 기본적으로 1세대 1주택에 대해서는 과세상의 혜택을 부여하면서도 다주택자에 대하여 과중한 조세부담을 지우고 있다. 1세대 1주택을 기준으로 비과세와 중과가 결정되는 세대중심주의의 주택세제는 비혼자나 사실혼 관계의 부부와 비교하여혼인을 앞두고 있는 남녀로 하여금 세대를 구성하지 못하게 하거나 혼인 중에 있는 부부 모두에게 세대분리를 하도록 하여 조세부담의 절감을 시도할 유인을 주게 된다. 독신의 남녀는각기 1주택을 보유하더라도 과세상 혜택을 받을 수 있는 반면 혼인한 남녀는 부부로서 1주택에 대해서만 조세감면의 혜택을 받을 수 있고 다주택에 대해서는 과중한 조세부담을 지기 때문이다. 이는 혼인 공동체를 비혼자나 사실혼관계의 부부에 비하여 차별하는 것이자 자유로운 혼인의 의사결정을 침해하는 것으로 헌법상 혼인의 보호에 위반되는 문제점이 있다. 현행 세대중심주의의 주택세제의 개선방안으로 우선 헌법상 혼인의 보호의 관점에서 과세단위를 개인단위주의에서 부부단위주의로 변경하는 과세체계의 개편이 필요하다. 부부단위주의에 의하여 주택의 취득, 보유 및 양도단계의 과세에 있어서 부부 주택 2채에 대해서는과세상의 혜택을 부여하는 것이 타당하다. 또한, 세대중심제도를 유지하는 경우에도 헌법상혼인의 보호의 차원에서 부부 기준의 주택수 판정을 2채로 하여 부부단위주의와 유사한 수준의 과세상 혜택을 부여할 필요가 있고 개별 주택세제에서도 장기보유특별공제의 거주요건추가, 부부간 증여에 대한 12% 증여취득세율의 적용 등 위헌 요소를 제거하여 헌법상 혼인의 보호에 부합하도록 주택세제를 정비하여야 할 것이다. 주택세제에 대한 개선방안은 헌법상 혼인의 보호의 기본권으로서의 자유권과 평등권을 침해하지 않고 나아가 비혼과 저출산시대에서 국가가 사회권으로서의 혼인의 보호를 적극 보장하는 것이기도 하다.

동성결합과 결혼체계의 자체생산

오정진 성균관대학교 법학연구원 2006 성균관법학 Vol.18 No.2

the same-sex union and autopoiesis of marriage system Oh, Jung-Jin Today, several nations grant same-sex union with effect similar to marriage. Moreover, there are the states which recognize same-sex marriage. But this paper upon the concepts of Niklas Luhman's system and autopoiesis reveals that such form allowing same-sex union is the way of autopoeisis of marriage system : the marriage system founded hetero-sex and legal marriage adapts selectively toward the environment of same-sex relationship and reproduces marriage system itself. And even the case same-sex couples can use the name of marriage, that is the one marriage system makes new boundary of same-sex marriage within intimate relationship. Therefore, if hoping for changing relationship and marriage, it will be better to deregulate hetero-sex legal marriage itself, guarantee multiple alternatives and go beyond marriage system.

사랑서사와 박경리 문학

김은경 ( Eun Kyung Kim ) 서울대학교 인문학연구원 2012 人文論叢 Vol.67 No.-

In this essay, I discuss the fact that ``love between a man and woman`` is of great importance in the novels of Park Kyung-ri. The fact that the narrative of ``love`` includes extra-marital affairs and marriage relationships shows the viewpoint of the author which is based in reality. The various relations of love and marriage (family), poses problems on love itself, the family system, and marriage. I discover four kinds of extra-marital affairs in the novels of Park Kyung-ri which illustrate the intricate relationships between men and women: 1) extra-marital affairs derived from marriage disorders, 2) extra marital affairs between close relatives (elder brother`s wife and brother- in-law), 3) extra-marital affairs based on mutual feelings of love between the subjects of adultery, and 4) extra-marital affairs that pursue benefit and lust. Type 1) shows that ``the exclusiveness of romantic love``, meaning that only love can lead to marriage, can not be true within the boundaries of the institution. In type 2), the elder brothers` wives lead the adultery with their brothers-in-law. The elder brothers` wives who are widows or do not love their husbands (i.e. do not receive their husband`s love) recover the damaged relationship of ``love`` and ``marriage (family)`` in the family system. Types 1) and 2) result from the undifferentiated rela- tionship between ``love`` and ``marriage (family)``. Types 3) and 4) show how loveless marriages bring about adultery. In type 3), the husbands who married as a means of social success fall in love with the adultery subject. In type 4), the wives form the adultery relationship as a means of enjoying material, emotional and sexual pleasure, and exercising power. Through these narratives of adultery, the author shows the limitations of ``romantic love`` and criticizes loveless marriage. And she also shows the position of the female character that remains within the family system. These issues are discussed in Chapter 2. In Chapter 3, I discuss the issue of ``selective marriage``. The four types of extra-marital affairs do not derive from an intersection between love and the system of family. With selective marriage comes a true harmonization of love and the system of family, by differentiating the two values of ``love`` and ``marriage (family)``. The aspects facilitating ``selective marriage`` are as follows: 1) the female character has the position of a social being that does not stay within the system, 2) the characters accept the plural loves that are growing loves (or possibly growing loves), which I call the ``love of companion``, and 3) characters who experience the unnatural death of family put ``marriage (family)`` above ``love``. Through these discussions, I can reveal that ``the narratives of love`` represent the problem of ``love`` and ``marriage (family)`` in keeping with the realistic view. Park focuses on the continuation of the system of family through the narrative on extra-marital affairs. The novels of Park do not contain an overthrowing of the nature of the affairs or a beautification of love. They contain, rather, her insights on the limitations of female characters in the family system. This essay suggests that ``selective marriage`` is a feministic alternative to this.

사랑서사와 박경리 문학

김은경 서울대학교 인문학연구원 2012 人文論叢 Vol.67 No.-

In this essay, I discuss the fact that ‘love between a man and woman’is of great importance in the novels of Park Kyung-ri. The fact that the narrative of ‘love’ includes extra-marital affairs and marriage relationships shows the viewpoint of the author which is based in reality. The various relations of love and marriage (family), poses problems on love itself, the family system, and marriage. I discover four kinds of extra-marital affairs in the novels of Park Kyung-ri which illustrate the intricate relationships between men and women: 1) extra-marital affairs derived from marriage disorders, 2) extra marital affairs between close relatives (elder brother’s wife and brotherin-law), 3) extra-marital affairs based on mutual feelings of love between the subjects of adultery, and 4) extra-marital affairs that pursue benefit and lust. Type 1) shows that ‘the exclusiveness of romantic love’, meaning that only love can lead to marriage, can not be true within the boundaries of the institution. In type 2), the elder brothers’ wives lead the adultery with their brothers-in-law. The elder brothers’ wives who are widows or do not love their husbands (i.e. do not receive their husband’s love)recover the damaged relationship of ‘love’ and ‘marriage (family)’ in the family system. Types 1) and 2) result from the undifferentiated relationship between ‘love’ and ‘marriage (family)’. Types 3) and 4) show how loveless marriages bring about adultery. In type 3), the husbands who married as a means of social success fall in love with the adultery subject. In type 4), the wives form the adultery relationship as a means of enjoying material, emotional and sexual pleasure, and exercising power. Through these narratives of adultery, the author shows the limitations of ‘romantic love’ and criticizes loveless marriage. And she also shows the position of the female character that remains within the family system. These issues are discussed in Chapter 2. In Chapter 3, I discuss the issue of ‘selective marriage’. The four types of extra-marital affairs do not derive from an intersection between love and the system of family. With selective marriage comes a true harmonization of love and the system of family, by differentiating the two values of ‘love’ and ‘marriage (family)’. The aspects facilitating ‘selective marriage’ are as follows: 1) the female character has the position of a social being that does not stay within the system, 2) the characters accept the plural loves that are growing loves (or possibly growing loves), which I call the ‘love of companion’, and 3) characters who experience the unnatural death of family put ‘marriage (family)’ above ‘love’. Through these discussions, I can reveal that ‘the narratives of love’represent the problem of ‘love’ and ‘marriage (family)’ in keeping with the realistic view. Park focuses on the continuation of the system of family through the narrative on extra-marital affairs. The novels of Park do not contain an overthrowing of the nature of the affairs or a beautification of love. They contain, rather, her insights on the limitations of female characters in the family system. This essay suggests that ‘selective marriage’ is a feministic alternative to this.

부부재산공유제와 증여세과세

이동식 한국법제연구원 2018 법제연구 Vol.- No.55

Marriage forms a minimal social unit. Marriage can affect not only relative relationship but also possession of property. Regarding legal issues related to marriage, mainly the civil law, especially the family law section, regulates. However, marriage has also a significant legal effect in terms of taxation. This article deals with the taxation of gift tax among them. In Korea, if you give more than 600 million won in assets to your husband and wife, the donee must pay the gift tax. However, there has been little research into the influence of the marital property system on the taxation of gift tax on the donation between married couples. There are two legislative approaches to the attribution of property held by married couples. The one is separate property system, the other is community property system. Under separate property system, husband and wife own property separately. The community property system recognizes marital property of married couple as a common property of married couple. The legal property system in Korea is separate property system. However, married couples can adopt the community property system as a marital property system by their agreement. Currently, most Korean couples are subject to separate property system as a marital property system. There is no legal problem to levy the gift tax on the donation between couples who are subject to separate property system. The problem is the donation of asset between couples who are subject to the community property system. In community property system, most property acquired during marriage (except for gifts or inheritances) is considered community property. community property means property owned jointly by both partners. Some argue that the gift tax can not be taxed between married couples who are subject to the community property system. In this paper, we examine whether these arguments are valid. 남녀가 법적으로 혼인을 하게 되면 기본적으로 친족관계를 형성하게되지만 혼인은 부부의 재산관계에도 영향을 미친다. 이러한 부분에 대해서는 민법 제4편에서 규율하고 있다. 이처럼 혼인은 다양한 사법적(私法 的) 효력을 야기하는 것 이외에 세법의 운용에도 큰 영향을 미친다. 그중 이 글은 혼인한 자간의 재산관계와 그것이 증여세 과세에 미치는 영향을 연구대상으로 하고 있다. 혼인한 부부가 보유한 재산의 귀속에 대해서는 크게 두 개의 입법방식, 즉 부부별산제와 부부재산공유제가 존재한다. 그 중 우리 민법은 부부별산제를 법정재산제로 규정하고 있다. 하지만 예외적으로 약정을 통해 부부재산공유제가 적용되는 부부도 존재할수 있다. 우리의 증여세제는 지금까지 부부별산제가 적용되는 부부를 전제로 하여 부부간의 증여에 대해 증여세를 과세하고 있었다. 그런데 부부의 재산관계에 대해 부부재산공유제가 적용되는 경우 그러한 부부간의자산증여에 대해서도 동일하게 증여세과세를 할 수 있는지 여부가 실무적으로 문제되고 있다. 동일한 사실관계에 대해 법원은 증여세를 과세할수 없다는 입장이고 조세심판원은 과세를 해야 한다는 입장이다. 아직 우리나라의 경우 부부재산 공유제를 취한 부부가 많지 않으므로 이러한 사안에 대한 과세가능여부의 논의가 중요하지 않다고 평가할 수도 있지만 만약 이러한 문제에 대해 현재 법원의 입장처럼 증여세를 과세하지 않는것으로 법해석이 확정되면 증여세 과세에 중대한 입법적 결함(loophole)이되어 심각한 조세불공평의 문제를 초래할 수 있다. 그렇기 때문에 비록아직 이러한 사례가 빈번하게 등장하고 있는 것은 아니지만 이러한 경우과연 증여세 과세를 해야 하는지 여부를 신중하게 점검해 보아야 할 필요성이 있다고 할 것이다. 만일 법원의 입장이 옳다고 한다면 결혼하는부부들은 부부재산약정을 통해 증여세제도를 무력화시킬 수 있는 여지도있다. 이 글을 통해 개인적으로 현행법의 해석상 부부재산공유제를 취하는 부부간의 자산증여에 대해서도 증여세를 과세해야 하는 논리를 제시하였다. 이러한 입장이 타당한지 여부에 대한 검증은 독자의 몫이다. 다만 이 글은 지금까지 우리사회에서 문제가 되지 않았던 부부재산공유제를 취하는 부부를 전제로 하여 증여세과세가능여부를 검토하였다는 점에서 중요한 의의가 있다고 생각한다. 아직까지 우리사회에서 결혼하는 부부는 부부재산제에 대해 크게 고민을 하지 않고 법정재산제의 적용을 받고 있지만 미래에는 어떻게 변화할지를 알 수 없는 상황이다. 우리나라의 부부재산제관련 민법규정들도 매우 부실한 상황이고, 상증세법도 다양한 부부재산제를 전제로 하여 합리적으로 정비해두어야 할 것이다.

이탈리아 민법상 혼인의 효과

우병창(Woo Byoung-Chang),마르타 짐바르도(Marta Zimbardo) 조선대학교 법학연구원 2012 法學論叢 Vol.19 No.1

이 논문의 목적은 한국에 잘 알려져 있지 않은 이탈리아 법제의 일부로서 민법상 혼인의 효과에 대한 소개이다. 그 주요 내용은 크게 두 부분으로 나누어지는데 첫부분에서는 혼인의 일반적 효력을 살펴보고자 한다. 이 부분에서는 「이탈리아 민법」 제1편 제6장 제4절에 규정된 혼인에 따른 권리와 의무에 관하여 살펴본 후에 기타 일반적인 효력에 관하여 설명한다. 「이탈리아 민법」 제143조(배우자 상호 사이의 권리와 의무)에 의하여 부부는 서로 충실, 정신적ㆍ물질적 부양, 가족의 이익을 위한 협조, 동거의무를 지고, 또한 배우자 쌍방은 각자의 재산 및 직업이나 가사수행능력에 비례하여 가족의 필요에 대하여 분담하여야 할 의무를 진다. 그리고 「민법」 제147조에 의하여 배우자 쌍방은 혼인에 의하여 자녀의 능력, 성향 및 포부를 참작하여 자녀의 부양ㆍ가르침ㆍ교육의 의무를 진다. 두번째 부분은 혼인의 재산적 효력(즉 혼인시 부부재산제도)에 관한 부분이다. 이탈리아에서는 1975년에 가족법(민법)의 개정을 통하여 부부공동재산제가 법정부부재산제로 채택되었다. 이탈리아의 부부재산제도 또한 세부적으론 약정재산제와 법정재산제의 두 가지로 나뉘는데 약정재산제는 부부가 반드시 법에 구속되는 것이 아니라 자유롭게 계약을 체결하여 부부 사이의 재산관계를 정할 수 있는 것으로서 부부는 법률상 규정된 부부재산계약제 중의 하나를 선택하여 쌍방의 재산에 관한 약정을 할 수 있다. 민법상 규정된 부부재산계약의 종류에는 부부별산제(separazione dei beni), 계약공동제(comunione convenzionale), 가족자금(fondo patrimoniale) 등이 있다. 끝으로 혼인의 효과에 관한 이탈리아 법제의 특징을 정리ㆍ평가함으로써 결론에 대신하고자 한다. This paper aims to provide an overview of the effects of marriage in the Italian Civil Code. Effects of marriage can be divided into personal and pecuniary ones. The first part of this article discusses the personal effects, including the rights and duties between husband and wife deriving from marriage, the effect of marriage on parental duties, the effect of marriage on a woman’s surname and other indirect effects. Personal effects mostly concern the rights and duties arising from marriage. Both spouses acquire the same rights and assume the same duties. These duties, that are fidelity, material and mora1 support, cooperation and cohabitation, are mutual and both husband and wife, according to their means and their ability for professional work or housework, must contribute to the family’s need (Art. 143 of Civil Code). Regarding the effect of marriage on duties towards children, parents have thc duty to maintain, instruct and educate their children, taking into account their capacity, natural inclinations and aspirations (Art. 147 of Civil Code). They must provide for these needs according to their means and their ability for professional work or housework, and if they do not have enough means, the ascendants, both legitimate and natural, must provide them (Art. 148 of Civil Code). The second part of the paper aims to introduce thc pecuniary effects of marriage, that is the matrimonial property system. In Italy through the 1975 family law reform, the community property system became the legal matrimonial property system. According to it, both spouses own together all properties acquired during the marriage (with the exception of personal assets), whether acquired together or separately. Revenues from the personal assets of each spouse and separate earnings collected but not consumed at the time of dissolution of the community and business enterprises established after the marriage and carried on by both spouses are also included (Art 177 of Civil Code). Personal assets of the spouses include assets acquired before the marriage or acquired during marriage by gift or succession, items for personal use of one of the spouses, assets which serve the exercise of the profession of one of the spouses, damages and pensions obtained as compensation for the total or partial loss of the ability to work, and assets acquired by the transfer or exchange of personal propriety if expressly declared (Art. 179 of Civil Code). The community property system is the legal system and it applies by default. All properties acquired, together or separately, during the marriage (with the exception of personal effects), belong jointly to both spouses. However, the spouses can choose, also after the celebration of the marriage, other regimes. They can prefer the separate property system, and doing so, they will own separately all property, pre-marital and marital (Art. 215 of Civil Code). They can also modify, with some restrictions though, the provision of community property regime. Besides, both spouses, only one of them or even a third party, can allocate some particular assets exclusively to the family's needs, establishing a family trust fund (Art. 167 of Civil Code). The last part of the paper brief1y discusses the strengths and weaknesses of the Italian effects of marriage relating system.

원복속기 고려 왕실 編制의 재정립: 同姓不婚 원칙의 流入과 封爵制 와해 과정을 중심으로

황향주 서울대학교 규장각한국학연구원 2023 한국문화 Vol.- No.101

This treatise aims at investigating how the endogamy system of the Goryeo royal family, which had provided a foundation of exclusive privileges for them, collapsed and the nobility system (封爵制) interconnected with this endogamy system was reestablished by active intervention of the Mongol empire. In 1275 and 1291, the Emperor Shizu of Yuan (Kublai Khan) criticized endogamy among the Goryeo royal family members as using a chinese terminology of ‘Dongseonghon (同姓婚)’. His argument against endogamy in 1275 was different from that in 1291. In 1275, the Emperor Shizu of Yuan regarded the Goryeo royal family as ‘one’ of noble houses in the Mongol empire because the king of the Goryeo at that time, the king Chungryeol, had got married with his daughter, the Princess Qutluqkelmish (齊國大長公主). The Emperor Shizu of Yuan emphasized that the Goryeo royal family had a duty to join the alliances among noble houses in his empire and showed special interest in marriages of the Goryeo royal women. But the king Chungryeol did not take any active actions for stimulating exogamy of the Goryeo royal women in contrast to his wife. His stance on their marriages changed only after 1291. At this time, the royal endogamy system of the Goryeo dynasty lost its authority and collapsed because of political pressure of the Emperor Shizu of Yuan and the logic considering the traditional marriage system of the Goryeo royal family as ‘barbarism’. After the Goryeo royal family accepted ‘the prohibition of marriage between persons with same surname’, its royal organization system became distinct from previous one in two spheres. First, level of contribution to the Goryeo-Mongol relations came to have great significance when qualifications and ranks of the royal family members were evaluated. Although special investitures were carried out for a few royal family members sent to the Mogolian military camp or capital from the period of war between the Goryeo and Mongol, the royal organization system, focused on plural kinship and marriage relations between the king and the other royal family members, was maintained. ‘The prohibition of marriage between persons with same surname’ emasculated this system, and in consequence, many members of the Goryeo royal family obtained royal ranks and privileges owing to the political status in the Mongol empire. Second, before the nobility system was completely replaced with Bongunje (封君制), which means the noble investiture system of kingdom (諸侯國), there already emerged a tendency of hereditary successions of royal ranks from father to son in the Goryeo nobility system. .

가족관계등록에 있어서 ‘본인’ 확인제도의 개선방안

문흥안 ( Moon Heung-ahn ) 건국대학교 법학연구소 2020 一鑑法學 Vol.0 No.46

가족관계등록부의 기록은 대부분 본인이 법률 등에서 정한 바에 따라 제출한 신고서에 의하여 신고가 이루어지고, 등록담당공무원이 이를 접수하여 수리한 후 이루어진다. 이 과정에서 형식적 심사권을 가진 등록담당공무원은 당사자의 실체적 의사의 존재나 그 진실성을 검증할 수 없다는 한계가 있다. 이 논문에서는 본인확인제도의 문제점을 해결할 수 있는 구체적인 방안을 제시하였다. 우선 Ⅱ. 에서는 현행 본인확인제도의 운영실태를 살펴보았다. Ⅲ. 에서는, 보고적 신고에 있어서는 출생이나 사망에 있어 ‘사실’의 증명력을 높일 수 있는 방안이 필요하고, 창설적 신고에 있어서는 사건본인의 진정한 의사를 확인할 수 있는 방안이 중요함을 알 수 있었다. 이를 위해 본인 대신 사자(使者)에 의해 신고서가 접수된 경우, 이러한 사실을 본인에게 우편이나 SNS 등으로 통지하고, 신고서의 적당한 여백에 통지여부를 기재하는 방안을 제안하였다. 출생신고에 있어서는 오류를 조기에 발견할 수 있는 기회를 제공하고, 불출석 사건 본인에게는 확인의 기회를 부여 하면서도 가족관계등록부의 오류를 조기에 발견하는 검증시스템으로서의 기능도 담당 할 수 있을 것으로 생각한다. Ⅳ. 에서는, 각종 신고에 있어서의 개선방안으로 1. 출생신고에 있어서는 현재 시범적으로 운영되고 있는 온라인 출생신고를 확대할 수 있는 방안을 구상하였다. 이미 의료기관과 건강보험심사평가원의 전산시스템이 보험금청구를 위하여 연결되어 있고, 건강보험심사평가원과 대법원의 가족관계등록시스템과의 연결 운용에도 특별한 문제가 없다고 보여진다. 그렇다면 의료기관의 출생사실의 통보가 출생등록을 위한 출생통보로서 기능할 수 있도록 법률을 개정하는 방안을 제안한다. 의료기관 등의 출생통보 의무를 명문화하게 되면 정확한 출생아동의 등록이 가능할 것으로 보인다. 다만 병원 등 시설을 이용하지 않은 출산의 경우에는 현재와 같이 출생사실을 증명할 수 있는 서류 등으로 출생신고를 하도록 한다. 출산사실을 숨기고 싶어 하는 산모를 위해서는 의료기관 등에서 하는 출생통보서에 출생아동의 아버지 기입을 임의 선택할 수 있도록 하고, 후에 출생신고서에서 출생아동의 아버지를 밝히는 방안을 제안한다. 2. 사망신고에 있어서는 사망을 증명할 수 있는 사망진단서나 이와 동일한 수준의 객관적인 서면이 없이 인우인 보증에 의한 신고가 문제된다. 인우인 보증제도는 신고자의 편의와 신속한 사망등록에 기여하였지만, 사망의 증명에 부합하지 않다. 사망진단서나 검안서와 동일한 수준의 객관적인 서면이 없이 사망신고를 접수하는 경우, 가족관계 등록지의 시·읍·면의 장이 가족관계등록 감독법원에 그 사실을 질의한 후 회답을 받아 사망신고를 처리하는 방안을 제안한다. 다른 한편, 이미 건강보험심사평가원에 알려진 사망사실을 사망의 등록에 활용할 수 있도록 의료기관의 사망사실의 통보를 의무화하고 이에 대해 사망통보로서 기능할 수 있는 법률개정을 제안한다. 복지시설이나 경찰 등 행정기관에 신고된 사망사실의 경우에도 행정정보공동이용망을 통해 가족 관계등록시스템과 연결하여 활용할 수 있는 방안을 제안한다. 3. 혼인신고에 있어서는 현재와 같은 극히 형식적인 혼인신고제도를 개편하여, 혼인이 법률행위인 계약임을 분명히 하고 혼인에 따른 권리와 의무의 내용도 명확히 할 필요가 있다. 혼인신고에 있어서는 혼인 당사자 쌍방이 직접 출석하도록 의무화하고, 출석이 불가능한 예외적인 경우를 규정할 필요가 있다. 아울러 쌍방출석에 의한 혼인신고제도는 혼인의사를 분명히 알 수 있으므로 현행의 형해화된 증인제도는 폐지할 것을 제안한다. Most records of the Family Register are recorded by a report submitted by the applicant as prescribed in the law, and by acceptance of a registration officer. This process bears a limitation that the registration officials cannot verify the existence or authenticity of the reported parties. This paper proposes specific measures to solve the problem underlying in the identity verification system. It starts by examining the operating conditions of the current identity verification system under Section II. In Section III. it identifies the need of a way to increase the proof of ‘fact’ in birth or death registration for reporting purpose, and the significance of the genuine confirmation of the case owner for the registration of establishment. It is proposed to notify such facts by mail or SNS so that anyone other than the person directly concerned could not know the contents, and suggested to mark the receipt of the notification in the appropriate margin of the report in case the report was submitted by on behalf. This provides an opportunity for early detection of errors in birth reporting as much as it gives the unattended case owner an opportunity to confirm, while serving as a verification system that detects errors in the family registration in the early stage. In Section Ⅳ. it explores the following improvement plans for registrations of birth, death and marriage; 1. As for the birth reports, a plan was devised to expand the online birth reports that is currently being piloted. This could benefit from the computerized system of the medical institutions and the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service that are already connected for insurance claim purpose. There also seems to be no particular issue with the connection between the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service and the Supreme Court’s family registration system. The only requirement is to have the law revised so that notification of the fact of birth of a medical institution can qualify as birth notification for an official registration. Accurate registration of birth would be possible by clearly specifying the obligation of birth notification by an obligor of registration and the medical institution. For the case of childbirth outside of the hospitals and other facilities, the birth report can be filed with the documents that can prove the fact of birth as current process. For the mothers who want to hide the birth, the oath of the entry field of the child’s father could be omitted in the birth notice issued by a medical institution, and recorded in the birth report instead. 2. In the case of death notification, the problem is from a report by an acquaintance without a death certificate or an objective document of the same level that can prove the death. Enabling death report by an acquaintance contributed to the reporter’s convenience and prompt death registration, but it does not satisfy the proof of death. In case a death report is filed without an objective document at the same level as the death certificate or an autopsy report, it is proposed that the head of the city or district of the family registration office to request the family registration supervisory court an official confirmation of the facts before accepting the death report. In parallel, revision of the current Family Registration Law is proposed to mandate the notification of deaths by medical institutions for the purpose of recording the deaths already known to the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service for the official registration, and to enable such information to qualify as valid death notification. The deaths reported to administrative agencies could also be validated and used for an official record in connection with the family relationship registration system through the administrative information sharing network. 3. With regards to the marriage registration, it is necessary to revise the formal marriage reporting system to make it clear that marriage is a legal contract, and to clarify the rights and obligations of the marriage. It is deemed necessary to oblige both parties to the marriage to attend in person for reporting the marriage, and to stipulate the exceptional cases where attendance by both parties is impossible. Since the marriage registration by attendance of both parties is clear enough to know the intend of the marriage, it is suggested that the current witness system be abolished.

헌법이 보장하는 혼인과 가족제도의 내용 ― 전통, 제도적 보장과 가족제도? ―

권경휘 ( Kyung-hwi Kwon ) 연세대학교 법학연구원 2019 法學硏究 Vol.29 No.3

It is the family system that the most important unit in human society is. Though the most common form is based on monogamy, various family systems have existed. By protecting the family system adopted by their society, each country secures its own legitimacy and ensures that the state itself is maintained. For example, Korea guarantees for marriage and family system, from the first Constitution to the current Constitution. But our Constitution does not explicitly state what type of marriage and family system is guaranteed. For example, Article 36 (1) of the Constitution does not provide a detailed picture of the family system, including marriage. Therefore, it is necessary to theoretically consider what is the content of the family system guaranteed by the Constitution. The concept to be considered in relation to this discussion is institutional guarantee, ie “institutionelle Garantie” in German. I believe that the following four themes on institutional guarantee developed by C. Schmitt should be taken to a lesser extent, even if the Constitution guarantees a particular system in terms of institutional guarantee. (1) Institutional guarantees are distinct from liberal fundamental rights. (2) There is a distinction between institutional guarantee protecting public institutions and institutional security protecting private institutions. (3) Institutional guarantees protect existing institutions and their main features. (4) Institutional guarantees impose the obligation on legislators to legislate specific systems. Only thesis of (4) can be accepted as it is. The fact that the Constitution adopts the family system as an institutional guarantee imposes the duty on the legislators to legislate the family system. The contents of such a family system should be regarded as determined by the constitution itself, not a family system as factual order. And it is the character of the objective order of basic rights to be realized through the family system that establishes the contents of the family system in the Constitution.