지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Lease agreement, a new form of commercial activity, so far has no legal specifics stipulated on the basis of the Commercial Law as to prescribe the rights and duties of both parties and relied solely on stipulations and interpretations, which in consequence generated a variety of disputes. To deal with this problem, amendments were made to the Commercial Law with regard to lease agreements, and notice of legislation was advanced in August 6, 2008. That is, in order to stipulate legal specifics on lease agreements in the Commercial Law, which has so far relied on practical stipulations, separate chapters and sections were newly incorporated into the amendments to specifically provide such concerns as the basic rights and duties of both principals of an agreement. By stipulating the amendments in the Commercial Law as such, an attempt was made to secure a legal stability in commercial transactions.
Concerning the classification of lease agreement, the amendments, while reflecting No. 19 of Article 46 in the current Commercial Law, perceive it as a financial transaction (physical finance), which is different from a rental agreement, so as to confine the definition of financial lease business to a finance lease on the basis of the Commercial Law, and, by interpreting operating lease as ‘rental agreements for other property’ in No. 2 of Article 46 in the Commercial Law, distinguish finance lease and operating lease clearly according to their legal properties. Regarding finance lease, however, a problem remains where ownership in terms of taxation and accounting and ownership in a legal sense disagree. So, as an effort to coordinate with the classification system of taxation and accounting, it seems that ownership in terms of taxation and accounting had better be awarded to the lease company in a finance lease agreement.
In the mean time, as it was pointed that most of the current stipulations for lease agreement fail to properly protect the users of lease agreements by not allowing them to cancel the agreements before maturity, exceptions have been made to the stipulations so as to allow cancellations before maturity if the user has an acceptable reason for cancellation. For operating lease, the conflicts involving cancellations before maturity are being settled according to the legal principles of rental agreement. However, as far as the defects liability and the maintenance liability for the object of operating lease is concerned, if the current stipulations were followed, which reflect the characteristics of lease agreement and, as a result, differ from those in the Civil Law, there comes a problem in which the stipulations become inconsistent with the legal principles of the Civil Law behind rental agreement. A further discussion on this matter would be necessary in the future.
Concerning the classification of lease agreement, the amendments, while reflecting No. 19 of Article 46 in the current Commercial Law, perceive it as a financial transaction (physical finance), which is different from a rental agreement, so as to confine the definition of financial lease business to a finance lease on the basis of the Commercial Law, and, by interpreting operating lease as ‘rental agreements for other property’ in No. 2 of Article 46 in the Commercial Law, distinguish finance lease and operating lease clearly according to their legal properties. Regarding finance lease, however, a problem remains where ownership in terms of taxation and accounting and ownership in a legal sense disagree. So, as an effort to coordinate with the classification system of taxation and accounting, it seems that ownership in terms of taxation and accounting had better be awarded to the lease company in a finance lease agreement.
In the mean time, as it was pointed that most of the current stipulations for lease agreement fail to properly protect the users of lease agreements by not allowing them to cancel the agreements before maturity, exceptions have been made to the stipulations so as to allow cancellations before maturity if the user has an acceptable reason for cancellation. For operating lease, the conflicts involving cancellations before maturity are being settled according to the legal principles of rental agreement. However, as far as the defects liability and the maintenance liability for the object of operating lease is concerned, if the current stipulations were followed, which reflect the characteristics of lease agreement and, as a result, differ from those in the Civil Law, there comes a problem in which the stipulations become inconsistent with the legal principles of the Civil Law behind rental agreement. A further discussion on this matter would be necessary in the future.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 리스의 구분
Ⅲ. 리스회사의 금융리스계약 해지
Ⅳ. 리스이용자의 금융리스계약 해지
Ⅴ. 운용리스계약의 해지
Ⅵ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (13)
참고문헌 신청
1. [단행본] - 김성태 / 2002 / 상법총칙ㆍ상행위강론(2판) / 법문사
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김필곤 / 1996 / 리스계약의 중도종료와 청산의무 / 리스금융 6 (2)
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 문기호 / 1994 / 금융리스의 법적 성질에 관한 소고 / 기업법연구 1
4. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 소건영 / 2009 / 부동산의 부합과 종물 - 대법원 2008. 5. 8. 선고 2007다36933, 36940 판결[공2008상, 832] - / 기업법연구 23 (1) : 451 ~ 472
5. [단행본] - 소건영 / 1997 / 리스거래법론 / 법원사
2. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김필곤 / 1996 / 리스계약의 중도종료와 청산의무 / 리스금융 6 (2)
3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 문기호 / 1994 / 금융리스의 법적 성질에 관한 소고 / 기업법연구 1
4. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 소건영 / 2009 / 부동산의 부합과 종물 - 대법원 2008. 5. 8. 선고 2007다36933, 36940 판결[공2008상, 832] - / 기업법연구 23 (1) : 451 ~ 472
5. [단행본] - 소건영 / 1997 / 리스거래법론 / 법원사
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
리스금융에 있어서 리스물건의 하자담보책임에 관한 연구
법과 정책연구
2008 .01
-
금융리스계약과 그에 관련된 보험의 문제 : 판례를 중심으로
비교사법
2014 .08
-
리스회사에 관한 소고
경영경제
2008 .08
-
리스계약의 중도해지와 리스보증보험에 관한 연구
기업법연구
2009 .12
-
중국 계약법에서의 금융리스에 관한 규정의 고찰
기업법연구
2006 .03
-
금융리스계약에 있어서 리스물건의 선의취득에 관한 연구
비교사법
2009 .03
-
임대차계약에 있어서 임차목적물의 이용과 관련한 법적 문제
법과정책
2015 .01
-
商街建物賃貸借保護法의 문제점과 改善方案에 關한 考察
기업법연구
2005 .03
-
DCFR의 Lease of Goods
외법논집
2010 .01
-
미국 U.C.C. 하에서의 진정 리스와 리스가장 금융거래의 구분
비교사법
2007 .03
-
리스거래의 다양화 및 그 법적 특색에 관한 고찰 : 미국과 일본 리스시장의 비교를 중심으로
법이론실무연구
2018 .05
-
「상가건물임대차보호법」 제9조 제2항 법정임대차관계 고찰
홍익법학
2019 .01
-
국제회계기준 IFRS 16 리스의 도입과 BBCHP 도산법 실무 고찰
한국해법학회지
2020 .01
-
전세권 저당권의 등기의 효력과 그 실행방법 : 대법원 2008.3.13.선고 2006다29372,29389 판결의 평석
중앙법학
2013 .03
-
일본 차지차가법(借地借家法)의 시사점과 도입가능성에 관한 고찰
동북아법연구
2011 .01
-
상가건물임대차보호법상 임차인의 지위 -주택임대차보호법과 관련하여-
원광법학
2009 .01
-
소비자리스(B2C lease) 관련 법제의 현황 및 개선방안
소비자정책동향
2013 .06
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-360-000498535