학술논문
보증계약상 채권자의 정보제공의무
이용수 15
- 영문명
- A Obligee s Duty to Disclose Material Information in the Contract of Suretyship.
- 발행기관
- 한국민사법학회
- 저자명
- 이상영(Lee, Sang-Young)
- 간행물 정보
- 『민사법학』제46호, 519~553쪽, 전체 35쪽
- 주제분류
- 사회과학 > 사회과학일반
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2009.09.30
7,000원
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 surety is entitled to suretyship defenses as defined in section 124 in the Restatement of Security (second) published by the American Law Institute(ALI) which distinguishes between where before the surety has undertaken and where, after formation of contract of suretyship. Subdivision (1) of section 124 prescribes Where before the surety has undertaken his obligation the creditor knows facts unknown to the surety that materially increase the risk beyond that which the creditor has reason to believe the surety intends to assume, and the creditor also has reason to believe that these facts are unknown to the surety and has a reasonable opportunity to communicate them to the surety, failure of the creditor to notify the surety of such facts is a defense to the surety. On the other hand, subdivision (2) of section 124 prescribes Where, after formation of contract of suretyship, the creditor discovers facts unknown to the surety which would give the surety the privilege of terminating his obligation to the creditor as to liability for subsequent defaults, and the creditor has reason to believe these facts are unknown to the surety and has a reasonable opportunity to communicate them to the surety without violation of a confidential duty, the creditor has a duty to notify the surety, and breach of this duty is a defense to the surety except in respect of his liability for defaults which have occurred before such disclosure should have been made. There is recognizing the duties of the obligee to the surety which give a proper information of the real state of finance and economic situation of principal, because there is unbalance and unequality of information between the parties. It has recognize the necessity that is the duty to perform according to the requirement of good faith between the parties before formation of contract because there is unbalance of social and economic status. It should be recognized that the duty of the obligee to disclose material information because there is information gap between the obligee and the surety. Although there is increasing the dispute over suretyship because of the recognition of the duty to disclose material information, it is desirable of the recognition of the duty to disclose material information in future-oriented view and improve the unreasonable customs of suretyship. It is adopt the duty to disclose material information in this tentative draft pursuant to section 8 of the protection law of surety which does not expressly provide in tentative draft in 2004. It is added subsection 2 of section 436 in tentative draft in 2004, Instead it dose not prescribe the obligee s duty to disclose information in separate section. The duty of notification is recognized only after contract of suretyship is made although the duty to disclose information is distinguished such as section 124 of the Restatement of security (second) in U.S.A between before and after contract of suretyship is made. This Tentative draft does not recognize the duty to disclose information as defined in subsection 3 although it does recognize the duty of notification about any critical situation arises with respect to the secured obligation which may lead to demand upon the surety if the surety request. What follows is the tentative draft which the fifth committee prepared: Section 436(2) [the obligee s duty to disclose information and to notify] ① The obligee must notify the surety as soon as any critical situation arises with respect to the secured obligation upon which the obligee knows and holds. It is same as when the contract of suretyship is renewal. ② The obligee must notify without undue delay the surety in case of a non-performance by or inability to pay of the debtor, the secured amounts of the principal obligati
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가며
Ⅱ. 외국의 입법례
Ⅲ. 보증인보호의 필요성 및 학설과 판례
Ⅳ. 분과위원회의 논의과정 및 입법안
V. 마치며
참고문헌
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
- ‘저당권에 기한 방해배제청구’(민법 제370조에 의한 제214조의 준용)의 입법적 구체화 검토
- 보증의 유형화
- 집합건물 관리비 채권채무의 당사자와 관리비채무의 승계
- 夫婦財産約定登記에 關한 考察
- 時效 및 除斥期間 관련 개정논의 예상 主要論點과 立法例
- 의사의 과실에 의한 임신·출산·출생에 따른 손해배상책임
- 보증계약상 채권자의 정보제공의무
- 법률행위능력과 의사능력제도에 대한 비판적 검토
- 전자거래규정의 민법에의 편입
- 자녀의 이익을 위한 가사사건 절차상 대리인제도
- 금융실명제하에서의 예금주의 확정
- 독일민법 제84조와 우리 민법 제48조 제2항의 비교법적 고찰
- 채권자취소권의 실체법상의 성질에 대한 고찰
- 독일의 건축공사 대금채권담보에 관한 고찰
참고문헌
관련논문
사회과학 > 사회과학일반분야 BEST
더보기사회과학 > 사회과학일반분야 NEW
- The Current Situation, Problems and Solutions of China's Basic Legal System of Digital Economy under the Background of Global Digital Governance
- Persistence and Breakthrough: Opportunities, Missions and Challenges of School Sports Development Under the “Double Reduction” Policy
- Research on the Issue of Chinese Youth Subculture Group in the Phenomenon of “Economic Fever”
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!