학술논문
차임증액청구가 인용된 경우 증액된 차임부분에 대한 지체책임의 시기에 관하여
이용수 47
- 영문명
- A Study on the Time of Responsibility for the Delay on the Rental Fee Increased in the Case that the Demand the Increase of Rent is Recognized
- 발행기관
- 중앙대학교 법학연구원
- 저자명
- 황경웅(Hwang Kyung-Uoong)
- 간행물 정보
- 『법학논문집』法學論文集 第30輯 第2號, 305~319쪽, 전체 15쪽
- 주제분류
- 법학 > 법학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2006.12.30
4,600원
구매일시로부터 72시간 이내에 다운로드 가능합니다.
이 학술논문 정보는 (주)교보문고와 각 발행기관 사이에 저작물 이용 계약이 체결된 것으로, 교보문고를 통해 제공되고 있습니다.
국문 초록
영문 초록
The trial court of the judgment for determining whether from when the tenant shall be responsible for the delay on the rental fee increased due to exercise the demand the increase of rent, Where the existing rental fee is paid, the trial court decided that the tenant shall be responsible for the rental payment of damage arise out of delay from the day after the decision on fixing the definite amount of the increased rental fee in the light of that the tenant shall not be responsible for delay, even though the tenant shall not pay the increased rental fee. While on the other, the appellate court decided that the manifestation of intention of the increase of rental fee comes into effect after the time tenant receives the manifestation of intention.
However, Though the payment of delay generally requires that it should be due to reasons attributable to the obligor as damages due to default, In the case of Monetary Debt, article 397, para. 1 of Civil Code(Special Provisions for Monetary Debt) prescribes The amount of the damages for failure to perform any obligation for the delivery of any money shall be determined with reference to the statutory interest rate(the agreed interest rate shall prevail), and The obligor may not raise the defense of non fault with respect to the damages referred to in paragraph l(para. 2 of the article).
The civil code is applied as the rental fee debt be considered to monetary debt. therefore the amount of the damages of the increasing rental fee is came from when the amount is increased. In other words, the manifestation of intention for the increase of rental fee comes into effect after the time tenant receives the manifestation of intention.
Accordingly, the decision of the trial court is not reasonable, but the decision of the appellate court is reasonable. However, Though it has become responsible for delay in performance due to reasons attributable to the obligor, the special provisions for monetary debt is applied as the rental fee debt be considered to monetary debt. Therefore the amount of the damages of the increasing rental fee is came from without the reasons attributable to the obligor. Appellate court decided that the obligor shall be responsible for the delay as soon as the increase of rental fee comes into effect. Such a framework of theory leaves something to be desired.
However, Though the payment of delay generally requires that it should be due to reasons attributable to the obligor as damages due to default, In the case of Monetary Debt, article 397, para. 1 of Civil Code(Special Provisions for Monetary Debt) prescribes The amount of the damages for failure to perform any obligation for the delivery of any money shall be determined with reference to the statutory interest rate(the agreed interest rate shall prevail), and The obligor may not raise the defense of non fault with respect to the damages referred to in paragraph l(para. 2 of the article).
The civil code is applied as the rental fee debt be considered to monetary debt. therefore the amount of the damages of the increasing rental fee is came from when the amount is increased. In other words, the manifestation of intention for the increase of rental fee comes into effect after the time tenant receives the manifestation of intention.
Accordingly, the decision of the trial court is not reasonable, but the decision of the appellate court is reasonable. However, Though it has become responsible for delay in performance due to reasons attributable to the obligor, the special provisions for monetary debt is applied as the rental fee debt be considered to monetary debt. Therefore the amount of the damages of the increasing rental fee is came from without the reasons attributable to the obligor. Appellate court decided that the obligor shall be responsible for the delay as soon as the increase of rental fee comes into effect. Such a framework of theory leaves something to be desired.
목차
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 차임증액청구권의 성질과 효력의 발생시기
Ⅲ. 지체책임의 발생요건
Ⅳ. 대상판결의 지체책임의 논거에 대한 검토
Ⅴ. 결론
〈Abstract〉
Ⅱ. 차임증액청구권의 성질과 효력의 발생시기
Ⅲ. 지체책임의 발생요건
Ⅳ. 대상판결의 지체책임의 논거에 대한 검토
Ⅴ. 결론
〈Abstract〉
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
- 중앙대학교 법학연구소 문화예술법센터 “문화예술과 법” 세미나 외
- 공적연금 법제와 실질적 평등
- 우리나라 예술가의 지위에 관한 보호법제 - 방송작가의 단결권을 중심으로
- 미국 독점금지법 준수를 위한 “반독점법 준수프로그램(Antitrust Compliance Program)”의 효용성과 그 내용에 대한 실무적 고찰
- 船主責任相互保險(P&I Insurance)의 法的 性質
- 금융기관 적기시정조치 제도에 대한 소고
- 계약교섭의 일방파기와 손해배상책임 - 대상판결 : 대법원 2003. 4. 11. 선고 2001다53059 판결
- 캐나다 예술가지위법에 관한 연구
- 차임증액청구가 인용된 경우 증액된 차임부분에 대한 지체책임의 시기에 관하여
- 전시 계엄법제의 합리적 운용에 관한 고찰
- 21세기 패러다임으로서의 지속가능한 개발개념
- 주상복합건축물의 개념과 특례(特例)
- 刊行辭
- 예술인 정책의 필요성 및 기본 방향
- 저작권 제한원리의 헌법적 해석
- 보험사들의 부당한 공동행위에 대한 판례평석 - 대법원 2006.11.23선고 2004두8323판결
- 유네스코 예술가지위에 관한 권고의 배경과 시사점
참고문헌
관련논문
최근 이용한 논문
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!