학술논문
口授證書遺言과 유언에 있어서 口授의 意義 - 대상판결 대법원 2006. 3. 9. 선고 2005다 57899
이용수 85
- 영문명
- STUDY ON THE MEANING OF ORAL STATEMENT IN A WILL AND AN ORAL WILL
- 발행기관
- 한국가족법학회
- 저자명
- 金泳希(Young Hee Kim)
- 간행물 정보
- 『가족법연구』家族法硏究 第21卷 3號, 349~390쪽, 전체 42쪽
- 주제분류
- 법학 > 법학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2007.11.30
7,840원
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
In the case of oral will, one’s last will and testament is done when the testator is on the brink of passing away, so that his capability of oral statement or its very existence comes into question. Oral statement means in conveying the testator’s last intent by verbal. In order to secure the testator’s real intent, the testator is supposed to directly convey his free intention in front of witnesses or a notary. Whether the testator’s intention is described in an ambiguous language, with the help of an interpreter or a doctor, by a mere gesture or through the judgement of witnesses or a notary comes into question.
According to the analysis as to the judicial precedents of public certificate will or oral will, failing to answer questions in a verbal way or showing a mere positive or negative sign by gestures when the testator leaves his last intent is not recognized as good as having an oral statement by the civil code. The testator need not state the whole intent of his testament. And when a third-party person prepares a draft and makes a general statement overall, it is recognized as good as having a clear intent of the testament. It is actually necessary to judge whether the oral statement is valid, taking into consideration the background, motive and rightfulness of the testament rather than the mere existence of verbal statement.
Besides, it is not deemed inappropriate to omit some parts of the oral statement or change the order of verbal statements when the true intent of the testator is correctly described with regard to the content and the testator himself gets involved with writing a will of his own free intent, viewed from the entire process of making the will. If an interested person deeply involved with the content of the will writes it himself, hindering the true intent of the testator from being secured, it is necessary to seriously consider whether to recognize the oral statement. It should be construed as valid, though, for another person to write a testament, when it merely helps secure the clarification of the statement.
A disease often reduces the testator’s capability of discernment or judgement by far. According to some judicial precedents of a patient’s oral will, the question of whether he is capable of making a will is closely related to the ability of an oral statement. When a disease reduces both the physical and judgemental ability of the testator so conspicuously as to make him unable to declare his intention even by gestures, his ability of a will comes into question. When taking into consideration whether a patient is able to make an oral will, it should be examined in relation to the question of his discerning capability to make a will, since the substantial judgement as to the oral will depends on testator’s ability of making a will regardless of the existence of verbal expressions. The question of whether the testator is capable of making a judgement, a discernment or a ability of will closely related to the ability of oral statement. Since a will is based on the assumption of the testator’s discerning ability, it should be deemed invalid when he lacks enough judgemental ability so conspicuously.
An oral will is a system that is recognized as a special method of making a will with ease when the testator is unable to make a holographic will. It requires standard procedure of oral statements however. I think, therefore, people with hearing and speaking disabilities consequently cannot execute these types of will. It is thus necessary to be considerate of people with hearing and speaking disabilities, so thar they could execute a oral will by allowing interpretations and approving the contents of the will to the testator and witnesses through readings and interpretations.
According to the analysis as to the judicial precedents of public certificate will or oral will, failing to answer questions in a verbal way or showing a mere positive or negative sign by gestures when the testator leaves his last intent is not recognized as good as having an oral statement by the civil code. The testator need not state the whole intent of his testament. And when a third-party person prepares a draft and makes a general statement overall, it is recognized as good as having a clear intent of the testament. It is actually necessary to judge whether the oral statement is valid, taking into consideration the background, motive and rightfulness of the testament rather than the mere existence of verbal statement.
Besides, it is not deemed inappropriate to omit some parts of the oral statement or change the order of verbal statements when the true intent of the testator is correctly described with regard to the content and the testator himself gets involved with writing a will of his own free intent, viewed from the entire process of making the will. If an interested person deeply involved with the content of the will writes it himself, hindering the true intent of the testator from being secured, it is necessary to seriously consider whether to recognize the oral statement. It should be construed as valid, though, for another person to write a testament, when it merely helps secure the clarification of the statement.
A disease often reduces the testator’s capability of discernment or judgement by far. According to some judicial precedents of a patient’s oral will, the question of whether he is capable of making a will is closely related to the ability of an oral statement. When a disease reduces both the physical and judgemental ability of the testator so conspicuously as to make him unable to declare his intention even by gestures, his ability of a will comes into question. When taking into consideration whether a patient is able to make an oral will, it should be examined in relation to the question of his discerning capability to make a will, since the substantial judgement as to the oral will depends on testator’s ability of making a will regardless of the existence of verbal expressions. The question of whether the testator is capable of making a judgement, a discernment or a ability of will closely related to the ability of oral statement. Since a will is based on the assumption of the testator’s discerning ability, it should be deemed invalid when he lacks enough judgemental ability so conspicuously.
An oral will is a system that is recognized as a special method of making a will with ease when the testator is unable to make a holographic will. It requires standard procedure of oral statements however. I think, therefore, people with hearing and speaking disabilities consequently cannot execute these types of will. It is thus necessary to be considerate of people with hearing and speaking disabilities, so thar they could execute a oral will by allowing interpretations and approving the contents of the will to the testator and witnesses through readings and interpretations.
목차
Ⅰ. 사실관계 및 판결의 개요
Ⅱ. 판례의 연구
Ⅲ. 結論
《참고문헌》
영문초록
Ⅱ. 판례의 연구
Ⅲ. 結論
《참고문헌》
영문초록
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
- 법적인 ‘아버지’를 결정하기 위한 요건들에 관한 일고찰 - 미국에서의 논의를 중심으로
- 사실혼배우자의 보호 - 특히 사망으로 인한 혼인해소의 경우를 중심으로
- 가족법상 북한이탈주민의 남한사회 정착 지원 방안에 관한 연구 - 이혼의 특례를 중심으로
- 과학기술의 발전과 일본가족법의 대응
- 성년후견제도의 도입논의와 영국의 정신능력법의 시사점
- 양육비청구권을 자동채권으로 하는 상계 - 부양청구권의 법적 성질과 관련하여 - 大判 2006.7.4., 2006므751 (공보 2006, 1525)
- 死後胞胎의 자기결정권에 관한 일고찰
- 인공생식에 관한 가족법상의 문제점
- 민법시행 이전에 開始된 상속과 相續回復請求權의 除斥期間
- 승려의 친족 및 상속에 관한 관습
- 死亡에 의한 事實婚의 解消와 財産分割의 類推
- 2007 하계학술대회 외
- 口授證書遺言과 유언에 있어서 口授의 意義 - 대상판결 대법원 2006. 3. 9. 선고 2005다 57899
- 發刊辭
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!