메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국재산법학회 재산법연구 재산법연구 제26권 제3호
발행연도
2010.1
수록면
1 - 27 (27page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The Korean Civil Law art. 408 stipulates a principle that obligations are separate when each debtor is bound to render only part of the performance and the creditor may require from each debtor only that debtor's part. However, this principle is regarded to have weakness in securing effectiveness of credit, as it neither consider security solvency nor reflect the current transactional practice. Therefore, many scholars, when they construe this article, have tried to restrict the establishment of separate obligations and to construe the provision to prescribe indivisible obligation with strong security solvency or solidary obligations. Majority opinion even construes it to prescribe presumption of solidarity. Court, having perceived the problem of security solvency, have also construed the article to include indivisible obligation in various cases. But court have not judged that the article could be construed to include presumption of solidarity, which is criticized by many scholars. However, it is not appropriate to construe the article as indivisible obligation even for monetary debt. Besides, in the light of legislative history, it is not possible to construe the article to prescribe presumption of solidarity. After all, a solution to construe the Korean Civil Law art. 408 to meet the current transactional practice can be moderated interpretation which recognizes it to prescribe solidarity implicitly. This research examined this issue through historical review and suggested a solution.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (25)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0