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.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
This article is concerned with reviewing theories and regulations about the duty of furnishing information on the Consumer Contract Law. The duty of furnishing information is required due to the structural inequality, especially serious discrepancy in information, in contract relationship. My approach in this paper is based on that the clarifies the concept of Consumer Contract Protection, and after reviewing various concept and scope regarding to regulations about the duty of furnishing information under the concept of Consumer Contract protection.
The Consumer Protection Act in Korea has been revised to enact and supplement the Consumer Fundamental Act which has been effective from March 27, 2007. However, in spite of the revision of the consumer law, the law has a lot of problems that are being criticized. In particular, the obligation to provide information is the most important issue. So, this article will investigate various theories regarding the obligation to disclose information. And then, this study considerations how Consumer Contract Law is responding to the information gap between consumers and businesses on the grounds of regulations under the special law and civil code. there is lack of legal responses to minimize the information gap between consumer and businesses under consumer contract. So we are called to equal-model this duty. The duty to disclose information is one of the typical examples of the legal responses to minimize the information gap.
In consequence, in this study I focus only on the issue of the duty of furnishing information on the Consumer Contract Law. This article will provide favorable implications to ‘the theoretical analysis and de lege ferenda‘ as it has effectively arranged and analyzed the obligation to provide information. In the future, we will study more about this problem is proposed that it should.
The Consumer Protection Act in Korea has been revised to enact and supplement the Consumer Fundamental Act which has been effective from March 27, 2007. However, in spite of the revision of the consumer law, the law has a lot of problems that are being criticized. In particular, the obligation to provide information is the most important issue. So, this article will investigate various theories regarding the obligation to disclose information. And then, this study considerations how Consumer Contract Law is responding to the information gap between consumers and businesses on the grounds of regulations under the special law and civil code. there is lack of legal responses to minimize the information gap between consumer and businesses under consumer contract. So we are called to equal-model this duty. The duty to disclose information is one of the typical examples of the legal responses to minimize the information gap.
In consequence, in this study I focus only on the issue of the duty of furnishing information on the Consumer Contract Law. This article will provide favorable implications to ‘the theoretical analysis and de lege ferenda‘ as it has effectively arranged and analyzed the obligation to provide information. In the future, we will study more about this problem is proposed that it should.
목차
Ⅰ. 들어가며
Ⅱ. 소비자계약상 정보제공의무의 법적 지위
Ⅲ. 소비자계약상 정보제공의무의 한계와 소비자 권리 강화
Ⅳ. 마치며
【참고문헌】
【Abstract】
참고문헌 (45)
참고문헌 신청
4. [보고서] - 송순영 / 2006 / 고령화사회 대비 상품선택정보 개선방안-고령친화용품의 표시를 중심으로
5. [단행본] - 이병준 / 2013 / 현대시민사회와 소비자계약법 / 집문당
6. [단행본] - 이은영 / 2009 / 채권총론 / 박영사
8. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 고형석 / 2009 / 소비자계약의 성립요건에 관한 연구 -당사자 및 객체를 중심으로- / 저스티스 112 : 92 ~ 123
9. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 고형석 / 2010 / 소비자기본법의 평가와 과제 - 소비자기본법 제정 30주년을 맞이하여 - / 저스티스 (120) : 5 ~ 47
5. [단행본] - 이병준 / 2013 / 현대시민사회와 소비자계약법 / 집문당
6. [단행본] - 이은영 / 2009 / 채권총론 / 박영사
8. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 고형석 / 2009 / 소비자계약의 성립요건에 관한 연구 -당사자 및 객체를 중심으로- / 저스티스 112 : 92 ~ 123
9. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 고형석 / 2010 / 소비자기본법의 평가와 과제 - 소비자기본법 제정 30주년을 맞이하여 - / 저스티스 (120) : 5 ~ 47
이 논문과 연관된 판례 (3)
-
대법원 2009. 8. 20. 선고 2008다19355 판결
[1] 분양자가 정확한 사실확인 없이 모노레일 설치사업의 실현가능성 등을 부풀려 광고한 경우, 표시·광고의 공정화에 관한 법률 제3조 제1항 제1호에 정한 `허위·과장 광고행위’에 해당한다고 한 사례.
자세히 보기 -
대법원 2007. 6. 1. 선고 2005다5843 판결
자세히 보기 -
대법원 2002. 9. 4. 선고 2000다54406,54413 판결
[1] 민법 제104조에 규정된 불공정한 법률행위는 객관적으로 급부와 반대급부 사이에 현저한 불균형이 존재하고, 주관적으로 그와 같이 균형을 잃은 거래가 피해 당사자의 궁박, 경솔 또는 무경험을 이용하여 이루어진 경우에 성립하는 것으로서, 약자적 지위에 있는 자의 궁박, 경솔 또는 무경험을 이용한 폭리행위를 규제하려는 데
자세히 보기
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2015-300-001389482