RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      중복등기와 점유취득시효 = Acquisitive Prescription and Duplicated Registration

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A82667485

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

      There is a room for doubt about whether or not Korean Supreme Court case has binding force. In Article 7 of Korean Court Organization Act, the judgment authority of the Supreme Court shall be exercised by the collegiate panel composed of not less than two-thirds of all the justices of the Supreme Court with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding. Where it is deemed necessary to modify such opinion on the application of the interpretation of the Constituion, Acts, administrative decrees, and regulations, as was formerly decided by the Supreme Court. In Article 8 of Korean Court Organization Act, any decision made in a judgment of a higher court shall bind the court of lower instance with respect to the case in question. Korean Supreme Court case does not bind de jure. But Korean Supreme Court case shall bind the court of lower instance and itself de facto. Therefore because Korean Supreme Court case binds force, it will have possibility of being maintained in future. I think that Korean Supreme Court case is regarded as resources of Korean Civil Law. Case study holds a key post in Korean Civil Law study in the Korean Law School system. The ratio decidendi of the Korean Supreme Court case is the point in a case which determines the judgment or the principle which the case establishes. In other words, legal rule derived from, and consistent with, those parts of legal reasoning within a judgement on which the outcome of the case depends. Unlike obiter dicta, the ratio decidendi is, as a general rule, binding on courts of lower and later jurisdiction-through the doctrine of stare decisis. By the way, Korean Supreme Court produces a little misunderstanding ratio decidendi with an inaccurate description now and then. Supreme Court Decision 93Da20177,20184 Decided Sep. 20, 1996 and Supreme Court Decision 2007Da63690 Decided Feb. 14, 2008 declared the latter of the duplicated registration becomes invalidity in such a case, the title holder of the latter does not claim acquisitive prescription. Supreme Court Decision 94Da30430 Decided Nov. 11, 1994 declared claim for acquisitive prescription is different from claim for duplicated registration, so that the title holder of the latter shall claim acquisitive prescription. In conclusion, the title holder of the latter does not claim that invalid latter registration is valid by reason of acquisitive prescription, so that the title holder of the former can claim cancellation of the latter registration. But the title holder of latter registration shall claim transfer of former registration by reason of acquisitive prescription as a counteraction.
      번역하기

      There is a room for doubt about whether or not Korean Supreme Court case has binding force. In Article 7 of Korean Court Organization Act, the judgment authority of the Supreme Court shall be exercised by the collegiate panel composed of not less than...

      There is a room for doubt about whether or not Korean Supreme Court case has binding force. In Article 7 of Korean Court Organization Act, the judgment authority of the Supreme Court shall be exercised by the collegiate panel composed of not less than two-thirds of all the justices of the Supreme Court with the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court presiding. Where it is deemed necessary to modify such opinion on the application of the interpretation of the Constituion, Acts, administrative decrees, and regulations, as was formerly decided by the Supreme Court. In Article 8 of Korean Court Organization Act, any decision made in a judgment of a higher court shall bind the court of lower instance with respect to the case in question. Korean Supreme Court case does not bind de jure. But Korean Supreme Court case shall bind the court of lower instance and itself de facto. Therefore because Korean Supreme Court case binds force, it will have possibility of being maintained in future. I think that Korean Supreme Court case is regarded as resources of Korean Civil Law. Case study holds a key post in Korean Civil Law study in the Korean Law School system. The ratio decidendi of the Korean Supreme Court case is the point in a case which determines the judgment or the principle which the case establishes. In other words, legal rule derived from, and consistent with, those parts of legal reasoning within a judgement on which the outcome of the case depends. Unlike obiter dicta, the ratio decidendi is, as a general rule, binding on courts of lower and later jurisdiction-through the doctrine of stare decisis. By the way, Korean Supreme Court produces a little misunderstanding ratio decidendi with an inaccurate description now and then. Supreme Court Decision 93Da20177,20184 Decided Sep. 20, 1996 and Supreme Court Decision 2007Da63690 Decided Feb. 14, 2008 declared the latter of the duplicated registration becomes invalidity in such a case, the title holder of the latter does not claim acquisitive prescription. Supreme Court Decision 94Da30430 Decided Nov. 11, 1994 declared claim for acquisitive prescription is different from claim for duplicated registration, so that the title holder of the latter shall claim acquisitive prescription. In conclusion, the title holder of the latter does not claim that invalid latter registration is valid by reason of acquisitive prescription, so that the title holder of the former can claim cancellation of the latter registration. But the title holder of latter registration shall claim transfer of former registration by reason of acquisitive prescription as a counteraction.

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      동일학술지 더보기

      더보기

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼