지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
Korea’s limited experience in the legislative process in the early days of the country led to quite a few legislative errors in modern laws in Korea. Particularly, the author discusses the technical errors in the Commercial Act and analyzes the backgrounds of these errors. The author analyzed the errors in the Part Ⅰ and Ⅱ (the General Principle of Commercial Act and the Commercial Transaction) in his former article five years ago. In this article, the author discusses the Part Ⅲ (Corporate Law).
The technical errors in the process of codification can be resulted in from various factors. The author pays particular attention to the legislators" failure of consideration of the harmonization between the specified rules and its relevant principle rules. In 1958, the new Civil Act took place of the old Civil Act which was enforced during the Japanese occupation and ensuing years after Korea’s independence in 1945. On the other hand, the enactment of the new Commercial Act was completed in 1962 to take place of the old Commercial Act. One could imagine that the commercial law, as a special private law, would have been based on the general principles of the civil law. However, that was not necessarily the case. The legislators of the Commercial Act of 1962, not being fully aware of the changes in the civil law rules in 1958, failed to fully harmonize the Commercial Act with the new rules of the new Civil Act. Several provisions of the Commercial Act, therefore, came to be left not compatible with the civil law rules. In addition, there were several cases where even the newly established basic principles of the new Commercial Act were not adequately reflected on the individual provisions of the Act. Ad it should be noticed that, while many new individual rules of Japanese revised Commercial Act of 1950 were introduced into the new Commercial Act of 1962, the legislators failed to harmonize the new rules and the existing principles.
After analyzing the erroneous provisions of the Commercial Act, the author then argues for the amendment of the Commercial Act to harmonize the provisions of the Commercial Act with the general rules of the Civil Act and Commercial Act.
The technical errors in the process of codification can be resulted in from various factors. The author pays particular attention to the legislators" failure of consideration of the harmonization between the specified rules and its relevant principle rules. In 1958, the new Civil Act took place of the old Civil Act which was enforced during the Japanese occupation and ensuing years after Korea’s independence in 1945. On the other hand, the enactment of the new Commercial Act was completed in 1962 to take place of the old Commercial Act. One could imagine that the commercial law, as a special private law, would have been based on the general principles of the civil law. However, that was not necessarily the case. The legislators of the Commercial Act of 1962, not being fully aware of the changes in the civil law rules in 1958, failed to fully harmonize the Commercial Act with the new rules of the new Civil Act. Several provisions of the Commercial Act, therefore, came to be left not compatible with the civil law rules. In addition, there were several cases where even the newly established basic principles of the new Commercial Act were not adequately reflected on the individual provisions of the Act. Ad it should be noticed that, while many new individual rules of Japanese revised Commercial Act of 1950 were introduced into the new Commercial Act of 1962, the legislators failed to harmonize the new rules and the existing principles.
After analyzing the erroneous provisions of the Commercial Act, the author then argues for the amendment of the Commercial Act to harmonize the provisions of the Commercial Act with the general rules of the Civil Act and Commercial Act.
목차
Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 新商法制定에 수반한 立法錯誤
Ⅲ. 新商法의 改正過程에서의 立法錯誤
Ⅳ. 맺는 말
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
영국 상사법의 개별입법화 동향
기업법연구
2009 .12
-
업체탐방-(주)ACTS
프린팅코리아
2002 .01
-
2010년도 상사법학계 동향 및 상사중요판례
경영법률
2011 .01
-
상행위법의 현대화 과제
기업법연구
2010 .09
-
2011 改正商法의 政策的 및 技術的 誤謬
증권법연구
2012 .09
-
중국 상법의 발전과 과제
동북아법연구
2011 .01
-
중국 민상법체계에서의 상사주체 －한국 상법과의 비교－
중국법연구
2010 .01
-
2013년도 한국상사법학계 및 상사판례의 동향
경영법률
2014 .01
-
中国民法典编纂中的立法模式悖论 ——基于商法规范如何安排的视角
원광법학
2017 .01
-
2009년도 상사법학게 및 상사판례의 동향
경영법률
2010 .01
-
2008년도 상사법학계 및 총칙,상행위법 판례의 동향
경영법률
2009 .01
-
방송의 상행위성에 관한 연구
法學論文集
2011 .01
-
상법의 관점에서 본 상법 회계규정과 기업회계기준의 조화
법학논총
2006 .02
-
《中国商法通则》立法体系构建研究
원광법학
2018 .01
-
會社整理制度에 관한 硏究: 會社整理法上「訴訟의 受繼」와 法理解釋의 限界
기업법연구
2004 .03
-
중소벤처기업에 적합한 회사법제의 입법 필요성 검토 -대·중소회사 구분입법을 중심으로-
법학연구
2019 .05
-
민법 제2편(물권)의 개정
재산법연구
2005 .01
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-360-001270700