共同相續人 간에 있어서 遺留分返還을 고려한 相續財産分割의 可否 = 從來의 通說에 대한 批判的 檢討

국문 초록 (Abstract)

현행법상 유류분반환소송은 보통의 민사소송으로서 지방법원의 관할에 속하는 반면, 상속재산분할심판은 가정법원의 전속관할에 속하여 兩者는 엄연히 별도의 절차를 통해 해결되도록 예정되어 있기 때문에, 현행법의 해석상으로는 상속재산분할심판에서 유류분반환청구사건을 병합하여 심리할 수 있는 법적 근거가 없고, 따라서 공동상속인 간의 유류분반환청구에 따른 공유관계의 해소라고 하더라도 이는 오로지 공유물분할의 訴에 의할 수밖에 없다.
立法論으로서는 기왕에 진행되고 있는 상속재산분할절차에서 유류분반환의 결과까지 고려하여 일거에 공유관계를 해소할 수 있도록, 가사소송법상에 견련관계를 요건으로 하여 가사사건과 민사사건을 병합할 수 있는 일반규정을 신설하는 방안도 신중하게 고려할 만하다. 다만 이 경우에도 실무상 운용에 있어서는, 미이행증여나 미이행유증의 목적물이 상속재산에 포함되어 상속재산분할절차가 계속중 유류분반환청구권이 행사되어 공동상속인 전원 사이에 공유관계가 성립된 경우에 한해서만 제한적으로 병합을 인정해야 할 것이다.

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

In the law in force, the lawsuit against return for legally secured portions is one of civil cases under the jurisdiction of the district court. In contrast, the judgment on inheritance division is under the exclusive jurisdiction of the domestic relations court. As the case stands, the two should be settled through separate proceedings. Thus on the construction of the law in force, there is no legal basis to try the demand for return for legally secured portions concurrently with inheritance division. In consequence, coparceners’ co-ownership can be severed only by the lawsuit against the division of public property.
In the aspect of legislation, a general rule deserves establishing in order that a domestic case may be concurrent with a civil case, contingent upon an affiliated case on family litigation act, which is expected to sever co-ownership at once in consideration of the results of return for legally secured portions in the process of inheritance division. However, in practical operation, it is advisable confine the rule to the cases where co-ownership was formed among all coparceners by exercising the rights to demand for return for legally secured portions in the middle of inheritance division including the object of unexecuted donation or unexecuted testation.
The correlation between the return for legally secured portions and inheritance division in coparceners, is closely related to the problem of how the domestic relations court and the civil court will share their roles with regard to the judgment on inheritance division entangled with the lawsuit against the division of public property, as well as how the future of domestic trials will be assumed, not to mention the problem relevant to the legal attribute of property regained by the lawsuit against the return for legally secured portions. Hereafter, it is called on to focus the relevant precedent to be established by the Supreme Court.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• 〈국문초록〉
• Ⅰ. 序說
• Ⅱ. 學說
• Ⅲ. 學說의 檢討
• Ⅳ. 立法論의 檢討
• Ⅴ. 結語
• 〈참고문헌〉
• 〈ABSTRACT〉