학술논문
최근 국제적 동향에서 바라 본 우리 民法上의 賣渡人의 瑕疵擔保責任에 관한 硏究
이용수 15
- 영문명
- The Seller s Defects Liability on Movables in korean Civil Law in the light of international s Trend
- 발행기관
- 한국민사법학회
- 저자명
- 사동천(Sha, Dong-Cheon)
- 간행물 정보
- 『민사법학』제24호, 3~46쪽, 전체 44쪽
- 주제분류
- 사회과학 > 사회과학일반
- 파일형태
- 발행일자
- 2003.09.30
8,080원
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
This thesis is to study about the Seller s Defects Liability on Movables in the light of international s trend. I have the opinion that the conclusion drawn out through comparative laws is acceptable in the light of the theory of the nonperformance of an obligation liability, it is a starting point to settle problems of our Civil Code. And, this thesis suggests legislative solutions. 1. Interpretation of Seller s Liability for Warranty against Defects in Korean Civil Law First. there is no provisions of the concept of defect in our Civil Code and Commercial Code. I think that it is preferable to understand the concept of the defect on movables as non-conformity of contract, which include discrepancy of explicit agreements, aliud-delivery, non-conformity of packaging, it consists of nonperformance of an obligation liability. Non-conformity of contract is decided first by the agreements of contract between parties. Except where the parties have agreed otherwise, goods must be fit for the ordinary purposes, any particular purposes, and expressed implied warranty. On the end, it is decided by making clear the purpose of contract. Second, I think that the repair of defect can be admitted, if we can regard articles 580, 581 of Civil Law as examples in remedies. On the other hand, I think that the buyer s right to require performance can extend to the repair of the goods, in Article 389 of Korean Civil Law, Because both liability systems are similar, in fact that there is not the requirement of a fault for remedy of the Buyer right. I think that the buyer may exercise the seller claims of repair and part of delay in both liability systems. Third, the condition of avoidance of contract should be interpreted in stricter manner than the condition of the other remedies. I think that the concept of the impossibility meeting contract goal in our civil law is superior to a fundamental nonperformance (fundamental breach of contract) in the light of 「 contract maintenance rule」. Fourth, I suggest that damages should be interpreted to mean the 「Performance Guarantee」, because avoidance or damages can exercise alternatively with a claim for delivery of substitute goods in Art 582(2) Civil Code, and stands on the premise that both rights have equivalent values, 2. legislative solutions(The Accommodation of International Theories) First. the repair of the defective goods should be viewed as a major right of the buyer. And it should not be restricted in case of defects which could not accomplish the purpose of contract, although when the repair costs excessively. Second, though it is common to limit a period of notification on the defect in trading between merchants to reasonable period from the time of recognition of the defect. It is not desirable to limit the period of notification on the defect of the hidden defect on goods to 6 months from the time of receiving. This period is unjustifiably short comparatively with international standard. Legislatively it is required either to extend the period to 1 year or 2 years or to replace the Article with a period for exercising the right. Third, comparatively it is more common to require buyer s recognition of defect and gross mistake for the ignorance of defect. Accordingly it will be legislatively desirable to require a recognition and a gross mistake of buyer as a requisite of elimination of liability, with the exceptions of when there are a recognition and a gross mistake of the seller and when the seller guarantees nature and characteristics of goods. Fourth, it needs that reduction of price is institutionalized as an ultimate remedy and the Bill of Amendment of Civil Law by Department of Justice provided right to reduce price in Article 580 section 1. But it did not provide about the basic time
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 매도인의 하자담보책임의 본질과 책임법체계
Ⅲ. 하자담보책임의 요건
Ⅳ. 매수인의 구제수단
Ⅴ. 맺는 말
참고문헌
키워드
해당간행물 수록 논문
- 유엔統一賣買法과 韓國賣買法
- 法人의 權利能力에 관한 一考
- 債務不履行責任과 瑕疵擔保責任의 통합 모색
- 現行 成年者保護를 위한 制度의 問題點과 代案으로서의 成年後見制度
- 경매절차진행시 저당권이 변제로 소멸된 경우의 처리
- 최근 국제적 동향에서 바라 본 우리 民法上의 賣渡人의 瑕疵擔保責任에 관한 硏究
- 東아시아法系論에 관한 試論
- 프랑스법상 하자보수를 위한 건축주의 강제공사보험
- 中國의 製造物責任法의 特徵과 問題點
- 유럽통일계약법과 한국매매법
- 性轉換의 民事法上 問題
- 韓國의 賣買法과 中國의 賣買法
- 독일 급부장애법상 채권각론과의 조화와 시사점
- 北韓의 賣買法
- 도급계약의 목적물 하자로 인한 하자보수비산정과 방법
- 매매계약의 교섭 및 성립
참고문헌
관련논문
사회과학 > 사회과학일반분야 BEST
더보기사회과학 > 사회과학일반분야 NEW
- 장애인재활상담사 보수교육 운영에 관한 인식 연구: 재활관련 기관 종사자 FGI를 기반으로
- 장애인재활상담사의 직무요인과 상담 전문성, 자기효능감이 심리적 소진에 미치는 영향
- 발달장애 근로 청년의 1인 가구 자립생활 지원 욕구에 관한 연구: 장애 당사자⋅보호자⋅지원인력을 중심으로
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!