본문 바로가기

추천 검색어

실시간 인기 검색어

학술논문

民法 第485條의 債權者의 擔保保存義務

이용수 137

영문명
Duty of the Creditor to Preserve Collateral Under Civil Act Article 485
발행기관
한국사법학회(구 한국비교사법학회)
저자명
정석택(Suk-Taek Jung)
간행물 정보
『비교사법』比較私法 제15권 제3호, 223~257쪽, 전체 35쪽
주제분류
법학 > 법학
파일형태
PDF
발행일자
2008.09.30
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

  As a general rule, financial institutions request collateral (of whatever kind) or a personal guarantor in extending credit, except for short-term credit transactions with a borrower of high credit standing. In case of long-term loans that are repetitively issued, collateral or guarantee may be replaced or released for the sake of transaction. In this regard, the duty of the creditor to preserve collateral comes into question. Financial institutions, in their credit agreement or collateral agreement, include a special clause that exempts the guarantor from the duty to preserve collateral and restricts the exercise of subrogated right under partial indemnification. This facilitates credit transactions with the debtor, in that it allows financial institutions to release or replace collateral and guarantee without the permission of the guarantor or the guarantor of secured mortgage. Since such exemption agreement between financial institutions and the guarantor is not in breach of good faith and public policy, it is deemed valid and is supported by court rulings.
  However, even if the validity of the exemption clause is accepted in general, the claim for its validation is not to be acknowledged without restrictions. Exemption clause has strong contrat d’adh?sion and if the collateral can be replaced or released freely based on the agreement between financial institution and the debtor, it may inflict unexpected damage on the guarantor or the guarantor of secured mortgage and even unfairly shift the responsibility on them in certain circumstances. In such cases, it is natural that certain restriction should be imposed. That is to say, if the creditor’s claim for validity of the special clause is in breach of good faith or is abuse of power, its validity should be restricted and the subrogee should be exempted from its liabilities. Furthermore, standards that suit the demand of facilitating credit transaction while protecting the weak should be established, based on reasonable interpretation.

목차

Ⅰ. 서설
Ⅱ. 담보보존의무의 법적 성질
Ⅲ. 면책의 요건
Ⅳ. 담보보존의무위반의 효과
Ⅴ. 담보보존의무면제의 특약
Ⅵ. 결론
【참고문헌】
[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

정석택(Suk-Taek Jung). (2008).民法 第485條의 債權者의 擔保保存義務. 비교사법, 15 (3), 223-257

MLA

정석택(Suk-Taek Jung). "民法 第485條의 債權者의 擔保保存義務." 비교사법, 15.3(2008): 223-257

결제완료
e캐시 원 결제 계속 하시겠습니까?
교보 e캐시 간편 결제