학술논문
판결의 하자(瑕疵)의 소송상 취급
이용수 19
- 영문명
- Treatment of defective Judgments in Civil Procedure
- 발행기관
- 한국민사소송법학회
- 저자명
- 손한기(Sohn, Hanki)
- 간행물 정보
- 『민사소송』제19권 제1호, 191~220쪽, 전체 30쪽
- 주제분류
- 법학 > 법학
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2015.05.30
6,400원
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
Minor defects on a Judgment are treated as cured(settled) when the judgment becomes a final one and take effects. But defrauded judgments, obtained by cheating the opposite party or the trial court, cannot be justified by simply emphasizing the legal stability. The basic procedural methods for redressing the injustices are retrial and supplementary appeal through which the defrauded judgement itself can be nullified. But when a defrauded judgment enters into enforcement, there arise issues for redemptions of the infringed properties. In general, to remove the binding forces, i.e., res Judicata and power of execution, of a defrauded judgment, the deceived can choose his(her) remedy among a retrial and a supplementary appeal, and in some cases, he(she) will be endowed with claim objections (Vollstreckungsgegenklage). But there are vehement controversies surrounding the applicability of the retrial and the supplementary appeal on certain special cases. We can see the most problematic case when a plaintiff files a suit with a false address of the defendant to bring about the mis-service of litigation documents on a disguised defendant and thus hamper the procedural activities of the real defendant. In this case, the judgement is bound to be delivered to the disguised defendant and the real defendant fail to notice even the rendering of the judgment. The established precedents of the Supreme Court and majority opinion of scholars hold that retrial(or supplementary appeal) cannot be applied on this case, in spite of the article 451 of Civil Procedure Law which provides such a situation to be one of the retrial grounds. They assert that the service of judgment on a disguised party cannot take effect and the case is still pending in the trial court. Thus the defeated party should file an ordinary appeal to higher courts in lieu of a retrial or a supplementary appeal. But it seems to be natural, taking the article 451 into consideration, to permit the defeated party to file a retrial or a supplementary appeal disregarding the validity of the judgment service. When the defrauded judgment came into enforcement, another difficult problem arises surrounding the recovery of the property loss of the defrauded party. It must be recovered through a restitution suit against the opponent or through a suit seeking for damages. But, in general, judgment enforcements cannot constitute unjust enrichments or torts. The Supreme Court holds that enforcement of a judgment does not constitute an unjust enrichment. So, the party seeking for the restitution, should annul the defrauded judgment through retrial prior to the restitution suit(except the above false-address case). Majority of scholars support this opinion. Unlike the above unjust enrichment suit, The Supreme Court shows a little mitigated attitude to a suit seeking for damages. It grants the direct filing of a damage suit without nullifying the enforced judgment when the infringement of the procedural rights of the defrauded party is excessively severe.
목차
Ⅰ. 판결의 하자
Ⅱ. 판결의 부존재
Ⅲ. 무효인 판결
Ⅳ. 재판의 누락과 판단의 누락
Ⅴ. 판결의 편취
Ⅵ. 결어
참고문헌
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
- 항소심 심리 개선의 방향
- 가사조정제도의 문제점과 개선방안에 대한 연구
- 한국에서의 ADR의 경험과 진전
- 민사조정법에 의한 조정절차의 공정성과 당사자의 절차적 지위의 보장
- 刊行辭
- 전자화문서와 원본제출주의
- 외국판결의 승인·집행에 관한 2014년 개정 민사소송법·민사집행법의 의의 및 향후 전망
- 배당요구종기의 법적 성질에 대한 연구
- 효율적인 집행과 국가책임
- 제6회 한중 민사소송법 국제학술대회 참석 후기
- 중재법 개정 법률안의 주요내용
- 가사소송에서의 미성년 자녀의 절차적 지위
- 독일민사소송법에서의 증거평가와 증명도
- 판결의 하자(瑕疵)의 소송상 취급
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!