독일의 유류분 제도

최준규

추천

검색

자료유형: 학술저널

저자정보: 최준규 (서울대학교)

저널정보: 한국가족법학회 가족법연구 가족법연구 제22권 제1호

발행연도: 2008.3

수록면: 257 - 302 (46page)

이용수

📌

연구주제

📖

연구배경

🔬

연구방법: 이 논문의 연구방법이 궁금하신가요?

🏆

연구결과: 이 논문의 연구결과가 궁금하신가요?

초록· 키워드

The object of this thesis is to survey the forced share system in German law from the view point of comparative law. In Comparison with forced share system in Korean law, forced share in German law has such distinct features as follows. First, forced share in German law is only allowed as a pecuniary claim. Second, ordinary forced share and extra forced share that is originated from lifetime donation are considered separately. So under the same condition, the total forced share (ordinary share plus extra share) and the statue of limitations can be different from those in Korean law. And the extra forced share claim against donee can be only permitted supplementarily when the claim against heir at law cannot be fulfilled. Third, inheritee’s lifetime contribution can be considered through three different ways (donation, contribution to children, contribution with appointment). But German system also has a similar structure to Korean system. First, only legal heir can have forced share. Second forced share is calculated regardless of legal heir’s economic necessity, emotinal relationship between inheritee and legal heir, legal heir’s contribution to inheritee’s property. Consequently the outcome can be unreasonable. I think that, in these cases court must apply bona fide principle actively and try to solve the problem positively (judicial activism). Forced share system has a character as a restriction on the testamentary freedom. Succession system can violate liberalism because succsession destroys equality at opportunity. However succession can contribute to liberalism on the other hand, because it maxmizes the inheritee’s incentive to increase his wealth. And when the inheritee doesn’t want to inherit his wealth to his children(so the inheritee’s incentive doesn’t matter), the ground for succession system disappears at least from point of liberalism. I think that, although we must accept the forced share, testamentary freedom has a superior status to forced share. And when we decide the scope and way of the forced share in concrete cases, this thought must be considered.

The object of this thesis is to survey the forced share system in German law from the view point of comparative law. In Comparison with forced share system in Korean law, forced share in German law has such distinct features as follows. First, forced share in German law is only allowed as a pecuniary claim. Second, ordinary forced share and extra forced share that is originated from lifetime donation are considered separately. So under the same condition, the total forced share (ordinary share plus extra share) and the statue of limitations can be different from those in Korean law. And the extra forced share claim against donee can be only permitted supplementarily when the claim against heir at law cannot be fulfilled. Third, inheritee’s lifetime contribution can be considered through three different ways (donation, contribution to children, contribution with appointment). But German system also has a similar structure to Korean system. First, only legal heir can have forced share. Second forced share is calculated regardless of legal heir’s economic necessity, emotinal relationship between inheritee and legal heir, legal heir’s contribution to inheritee’s property. Consequently the outcome can be unreasonable. I think that, in these cases court must apply bona fide principle actively and try to solve the problem positively (judicial activism). Forced share system has a character as a restriction on the testamentary freedom. Succession system can violate liberalism because succsession destroys equality at opportunity. However succession can contribute to liberalism on the other hand, because it maxmizes the inheritee’s incentive to increase his wealth. And when the inheritee doesn’t want to inherit his wealth to his children(so the inheritee’s incentive doesn’t matter), the ground for succession system disappears at least from point of liberalism. I think that, although we must accept the forced share, testamentary freedom has a superior status to forced share. And when we decide the scope and way of the forced share in concrete cases, this thought must be considered.

#forced share in German law #forced share in German law #pecuniary claim #pecuniary claim #property right #property right #ordinary forced share #ordinary forced share #extra forced share #extra forced share #testamentary freedom #testamentary freedom #liberalism #liberalism

참고문헌

참고문헌 신청

최근 본 자료

전체보기

배경 및 목적
대상 및 방법론
분석 및 수행
결과 및 의의

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	원문	원문 PDF 파일
AI 학습용 데이터	원문 + 메타 (기본/상세)	원문 PDF 파일 및 서지정보 CSV
대량 구매용 데이터	B2B 구독 방식	특정 자료 한정으로 원문 접근 권한 부여
대량 구매용 데이터	URL 전달 방식	바로 PDF 뷰어를 열람할 수 있는 URL 제공

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	기본 메타	발행기관명, 간행물명, 권호명, 권(vol), 호(issue), 통권, 발행연도, 발행월, 논문명, 저자명, 시작페이지, 종료페이지, 전체페이지, 상세페이지URL
상세 메타 데이터	발행기관 메타	발행기관 이명, 영문명, 창립연도, 홈페이지URL, 발행기관 소개
	간행물 메타	부제목, 간행물 유형, ISSN, ISBN, 최초발행연도, 폐간연도, 간행빈도, 발행주기, 등재사항, 이용수, 피인용수, 권호수, 논문수, 표지이미지
	논문 메타	작성 언어, 부제목, 대등제목, 목차, 키워드, 초록, 이미지, 참고문헌, 이용수, 피인용수, 논문활용도, DBpia통합주제분류, KDC분류, DDC분류, 한국연구재단분류, UCI, DOI
	저자 메타	소속기관, 소속부서, 직급, 연구분야, 연구키워드, 이용수, 피인용수, 저자 논문활용도

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
※ 결합형/맞춤형 메타 데이터는 신청 내용에 따라 다양하게 제공 가능
이용순위 정보	주제분야별 많이 이용된 논문	“인문학”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	이용기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“중고등학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	세부기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“서울대학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	키워드별 많이 이용된 논문	“Chat GPT”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
키워드 정보	많이 이용된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 이용된 키워드
	많이 발행된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 발행된 키워드
	많이 검색된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 검색된 키워드
	연구 트렌드 키워드	특정 키워드 연관 연구동향 분석 데이터 키워드

논문 기본 정보

초록· 키워드

AI가 분석한 연구 핵심

이 논문의 한줄 요약

이 논문의 연구방법

목차

참고문헌

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

댓글(0)