신용계약의 규율방향 시론 - 대부신용을 중심으로 - = The Way to Regulate Credit Contract - A Study on the Loan Credit -

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

When it is based on the forms of credit available, the credit transaction can be classified into loan credit (net credit), sales credit and lease credit. It is a characteristic of the current Korean legislation that various special laws exist for regulating each region of such credit transactions. The problem is that as these special laws were enacted for each individual purpose, not being governed systematically by comprehensive concepts such as credit contract or consumer credit, the mutual relationship between the individual law and the range of disciplines remain unclear or vague. Consequently, credit laws are recognized as the highly complex and esoteric realm. Thus, special laws on credit contracts for a variety of purposes require a more detailed analysis on the discipline system or the mutual relationship. Considering the above problem, this article examined mainly the loan credit.
Loan credit has two main issues in terms of the civil law, that is, how to be regulated by contract law (the issue of contract law) and how to regulate the high interest (the issue of interest limitation). After the examination of the current laws (Civil Code, Loan Credit Business Act,Interest Limitation Act), this article suggested the way to incorporate the main ideas of credit contract into the Civil Code by subdividing the section of 'loan contract for consumption' of the Civil Code into the general provisions, loan credit, sales credit. Interest Limitation Act may be incorporated into the 'loan credit', however, the dual structure of interest limitation (i.e., the vertical split into the Interest limitation Act and the Loan Credit Business Act) shall be settled first. Additional things other than Interest Limitation Act shall be determined through the review of the practical needs and of comparative laws.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 백태승, "利子債權과 利子의 制限" 법학연구원 17 (17): 1-32, 2007

2 김대정, "현행법상 利子制限에 관한 연구" 중앙법학회 9 (9): 315-364, 2007

3 백태승, "현저하게 고율로 정해진 이자 약정의 효력 및 이미 지급된 초과이자의 반환청구권 - 대상: 대법원 2007. 2. 15. 선고 2004다50426 전원합의체판결 -" 법학연구원 17 (17): 267-292, 2007

4 서희석, "한국민법에 대한 일본민법의 영향과 향후의 관계 - 비교법의 연구대상으로서의 일본민법을 위하여 -" 한국민사법학회 52 : 101-156, 2010

5 곽윤직, "채권총론" 박영사 2004

6 백태승, "이자제한법 조속히 부활하여 고리피해 막아야" 2006

7 어인의, "이자규제의 문제점과 이자제한법 부활론" 청주대학교 18 : 2002

8 송덕수, "신민법강의[제4판]" 박영사 2011

9 윤일구, "소비자보호를 위한 이자제한의 법리" 법학연구소 30 (30): 311-338, 2010

10 서희석, "소비자법의 민법전편입 방안 －한국소비자법의 특징과 이론적 정합성의 관점에서－" 법학연구소 31 (31): 249-280, 2011

11 송오식, "소비자계약의 유형과 법적 규율" 27 (27): 2007

12 황태희, "소비자 신용의 규제와 입법에 관한 소고" 행정법이론실무학회(行政法理論實務學會) (22) : 185-200, 2008

13 이헌욱, "서민금융의 현실과 신용소비자보호법제의 구축을 위한 시론" 법과사회이론학회 (31) : 61-90, 2006

14 김형배, "민법학강의[제10판]" 신조사 2011

15 곽윤직, "민법주해 15⋅채권(8)" 박영사 1992

16 지원림, "민법강의[제9판]" 홍문사 2011

17 김준호, "민법강의[제17판]" 법문사 2011

18 윤부찬, "미국의 이자제한법과 우리에의 시사점" 한국비교사법학회 13 (13): 251-295, 2006

19 김대규, "대부이자의 상한규제에 대한 비교법적 고찰" 한국비교사법학회 15 (15): 497-530, 2008

20 金 大 貞, "利子債權과 貸付業法에 의한 利子의 制限" 중앙법학회 6 (6): 199-239, 2004