본문 바로가기

추천 검색어

실시간 인기 검색어

학술논문

2重賣買의 법률관계

이용수 143

영문명
Juristic Relation in the Second Sale on a Thing
발행기관
한국재산법학회
저자명
강태성(Kang Tae-Seong)
간행물 정보
『재산법연구』재산법연구 제22권 제1호, 1~35쪽, 전체 35쪽
주제분류
법학 > 법학
파일형태
PDF
발행일자
2005.06.01
7,000

구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.

1:1 문의
논문 표지

국문 초록

영문 초록

In the second sale on a thing, Korean common views and judical precedents have a large number of problems. This study discourses upon these problems. In the following sentences, the second sale on a thing shall be called the second sale, and juristic act on the real right shall be called juristic act. Ⅰ. The validity of The Second Sale (1) The validity in foreign countries. I discoursed upon theories and judical precedents in Japan, France and German. In these countries, theories and judical precedents do not admit that the second sale in which the second buyer would lend himself positively is invalid, since it is against the social order. (2) The validity in the Republic of Korea The common views and judical precedents in Korea admit that the second sale in which the second buyer lend himself positively is invalid, since it is against the social order. I assert that the second sale is valid in principle, but invalid in some cases. furthermore, I assert that the second buyer is not liable for damages toward the first buyer in principle. Ⅱ. Is the Juristic Act Also Invalid? In case the second sale is invalid, is 'the second sale as the juristic act' also invalid? Firstly, I discourse upon theories and judical precedents in the Republic of Korea and German. And, I assert that the second sale as juristic act' is not invalid by Civil Act article 103. Ⅲ. The Return of Unjust Enrichment? When Performance is paid for the second sale which is against the social order in Civil Act article 103, can the performer demand the return of unjust enrichment? Judical precedent is affirmative for it. then, in the views of theories, majority is affirmative for it, but minority is negative. In my point of view, judging from the attribute of invalidity, it is right what is affirmative for it. therefore, Civil Act article 746 should not be applicable to this second sale.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 2중매매계약의 효력
Ⅲ. 무효의 범위
Ⅳ. 무효인 경우에 있어서의 반환문제
Ⅴ. 그 밖의 법률관계
Ⅵ. 맺음말
Abstract

키워드

해당간행물 수록 논문

참고문헌

교보eBook 첫 방문을 환영 합니다!

신규가입 혜택 지급이 완료 되었습니다.

바로 사용 가능한 교보e캐시 1,000원 (유효기간 7일)
지금 바로 교보eBook의 다양한 콘텐츠를 이용해 보세요!

교보e캐시 1,000원
TOP
인용하기
APA

강태성(Kang Tae-Seong). (2005).2重賣買의 법률관계. 재산법연구, 22 (1), 1-35

MLA

강태성(Kang Tae-Seong). "2重賣買의 법률관계." 재산법연구, 22.1(2005): 1-35

결제완료
e캐시 원 결제 계속 하시겠습니까?
교보 e캐시 간편 결제