The one party has deal in land, occupies and possesses its specific part of land, and then has co-ownership registration. At that time legal situation of the co-ownership representing de facto partition ownership is formed. The relationshi...
http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A76472925
2006
-
360
KCI등재
학술저널
207-231(25쪽)
15
0
상세조회0
다운로드다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)
The one party has deal in land, occupies and possesses its specific part of land, and then has co-ownership registration. At that time legal situation of the co-ownership representing de facto partition ownership is formed. The relationshi...
The one party has deal in land, occupies and possesses its specific part of land, and then has co-ownership registration. At that time legal situation of the co-ownership representing de facto partition ownership is formed. The relationship between sale parties of the co-ownership representing de facto partition ownership is independent ownership internally and co-ownership registration with shares externally. The co-ownership representing de facto partition ownership has come into existence in the course from the principle of the opposition requisite to the principle of the materialization requisite in enforcement of Korean Civil Law in 1960.<BR> The co-ownership representing de facto partition ownership is used in dealing land or buildings. These days the more cases of the co-ownership representing de facto partition ownership is found in the Supreme Court"s precedents. But the academic world does not have discussed with these cases. So the view of the another mutual name trust relation is ruled in the Supreme Court, but I have different opinion. I suggest that the co-ownership representing de facto partition ownership is not another mutual name trust relation but co-ownership. In my opinion, we can resolve the problems of the legal superficies and void shares.
목차 (Table of Contents)
북한의 핵무기비확산조약(NPT) 탈퇴에 대한 법적 평가와 그 전망
정리해고의 정당성 - 대법원 2006.1.26. 선고 2003다69393 판결
학술지 이력
연월일 | 이력구분 | 이력상세 | 등재구분 |
---|---|---|---|
2022 | 평가예정 | 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증) | |
2019-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 선정 (계속평가) | |
2018-12-01 | 평가 | 등재후보로 하락 (계속평가) | |
2017-10-24 | 학회명변경 | 한글명 : 법학연구소 -> 법학연구원 | |
2015-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | |
2011-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | |
2009-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (등재유지) | |
2008-10-10 | 학술지명변경 | 외국어명 : 미등록 -> SungKyunKwan Law Review | |
2008-05-13 | 학회명변경 | 한글명 : 비교법연구소 -> 법학연구소영문명 : Institute for Comparative Legal Studies -> The Institute of Legal Studies | |
2006-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) | |
2005-01-01 | 평가 | 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) | |
2003-07-01 | 평가 | 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) |
학술지 인용정보
기준연도 | WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) | KCIF(2년) | KCIF(3년) |
---|---|---|---|
2016 | 0.64 | 0.64 | 0.71 |
KCIF(4년) | KCIF(5년) | 중심성지수(3년) | 즉시성지수 |
0.6 | 0.57 | 0.849 | 0.28 |