이혼 재산분할 제도의 개선방안 ―분할대상과 분할비율에 관한 개정의견을 중심으로― = Ideas on Improving the Distribution of Assets upon Divorce by Regulating the Property to be Distributed and the Distribution Ratio

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The right to claim property division upon divorce was introduced by the revision of the Civil Act in 1990. The purpose of the property division upon divorce is to achieve substantial equality between the spouses not only during the marriage but also after dissolution of the marriage by distributing property appropriately and equitably when marriage is dis- solved. In the property division trial, a conclusion is drawn through the process of calculating the property subject to division and determining the division ratio, so the judgment on these two issues is decisive for the appropriate property division. Though the law should be able to provide legal principles for the two issues, the current statute does not provide predictable standards. Therefore, it is necessary to revise the Civil Act to clearly define the property to be divided and the ratio of division.
According to the case law regarding the property subject to division, the court can order division of substantive common property, that is the property formed through the cooperation of both spouses, regardless of the name of the owner. Even the inherited property and gifts can be in- cluded in the property subject to division if the other spouse contributed to its maintenance or prevention of its reduction. The current proposed revision of the Civil Act stipulates that common property and the property based on the common property are subject to division. There may be many other ways to define property to be divided in a way that is consis- tent with the people’s legal opinion and provides clear standards. As such, I present two methods. First, for couples who have been married for more than a certain period of time or have several common children, all of their assets can be considered as property subject to division. Second, in principle, it is possible to consider the property set by the parties in the marital property agreement as the property subject to division, and if there is no such agreement, all of their assets may be considered as property subject to division.
Currently, the law does not stipulate any division ratio, so the court sets the division ratio for each case. But considering the nature of the marriage system, it is reasonable for the law to declare equal division as a principle. However, exceptions need to be granted to doing equal divi- sion. Proposed revisions of the Civil Act both past and present stipulate that common property is divided equally, while each spouse’s own prop- erty acquired by inheritance or as such is not. We can also modify the principle of equal division in other ways. For example, we can choose a way that the residence for marriage cohabitation should be divided equally, while the rest can be divided differently. Alternatively, the law can require the spouses to set the division ratio by marital property agree- ment, and if there is no such agreement, to divide the property equally.
If the law is revised to set a uniform standard about the property divi- sion in case there is no agreement, it will be necessary to improve the marital property agreement system more convenient and reliable for the spouses who want to form their marital lives according to their own will.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 민유숙, "주석민법 친족(1)" 한국사법행정학회 2020

2 김영식, "재산분할청구의 부양적 측면에 관한 고찰" 법원도서관 62 : 2017

3 민유숙, "재산분할제도에 관한 입법론 ― 분할비율을 중심으로" 한국가족법학회 15 (15): 2001

4 최은정, "재산분할의 기준 정립을 위한 방안 연구" 사법정책연구원 2016

5 이선미, "재산분할 비율에 관한 서울가정법원 2014년 실무례 분석" 한국가족법학회 29 (29): 295-328, 2015

6 김주수, "이혼시의 재산분할청구권" 판례월보사 (253) : 1991

7 한봉희, "이혼법개정의 제문제" 가족법의 제문제, 법무부 55 : 1984

8 박민수 ; 이동진 ; 오정일, "이혼 후 재산분할의 비율 및 이혼 위자료액의 결정: 2009년~2011년 합의부 재판례의 실증분석" 한국가족법학회 28 (28): 99-132, 2014

9 민유숙, "외국의 부부재산제도와 재산분할 제도 및 부양제도 ― 미국법을 중심으로" 법원도서관 31 : 2000

10 박보영, "실무연구IV" 서울가정법원 1999

11 김은아, "부부재산제의 과거, 현재, 그리고 미래 ― 일본민법과의 비교를 중심으로 ―" 한국가족법학회 35 (35): 73-104, 2021

12 김현진, "부부재산제와 재산분할에 관한 소고 - 프랑스 부부재산제와 청산을 중심으로 -" 법제처 (695) : 99-143, 2021

13 이진기, "부부재산분할청구권의 보전을 위한 취소권제도 비판" 대한변호사협회 (392) : 37-54, 2009

14 김명숙, "부부재산관계에 대한 검토 - 부부공동생활의 실태와 새로운 부의 창출에 대응하여" 법학연구원 (56) : 221-260, 2010

15 장승두, "법정 4, 11" 법정사 1949

16 "법원실무제요 가사[II]" 사법연수원 2021

17 오종근, "독일민법전 가족법" 법무부 2020

18 서정우, "개정민법의 몇 가지 문제점" 한국사법행정학회 (354) : 1990

19 김주수, "가족법개정안에 대한 소고" 대한변호사협회 (9) : 1974

20 배경숙, "가족법 개정의 이유와 그 방향" 가족법의 제문제, 법무부 55 : 1984

21 전주혜, "가사재판연구 I" 서울가정법원 가사재판연구회 2007

22 Harris, "Family Law" Wolters Kluwer Law & Business 2014

23 봉희, "2000년대를 향한 한국가족법의 위상에 관한 연구 ― 1991년 시행가족법과 관련하여" 한국가족법학회 (5) : 1991