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
인문학
인문학 일반 역사학 철학 종교학 어문학 기타 인문학
사회과학
사회과학 일반 경영학 관광학 교육학 군사학 문헌정보학 법학 사회학 신문방송학 심리과학 정치외교학 지리학 행정학 경제학 무역학 인류학 기타 사회과학
자연과학
자연과학 일반 물리학 생물학 생활과학 수학·통계학 천문학 지구과학 화학 기타 자연과학
공학
공학 일반 건축공학 기계공학 산업공학 재료·에너지공학 전기전자공학 조선해양공학 화학공학 컴퓨터학 기타공학
의약학
의학 일반 간호학 수의학 약학 한의학 기초의학 임상의학 기타 의약학
농수해양학
농수해양학 일반 농학 수산학 식품과학 임학 축산학 해상운송학 기타 농수해양학
예술체육학
예술 일반 디자인 미술 미용 사진 음악학 의상 체육 공연매체예술 기타 예술체육학
복합학
학제간연구 과학기술학 뇌인지과학 기술정책 기타 복합학

ENG

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
김수정 (독일 Freiburg 대학교 박사과정)
저널정보
한국가족법학회 가족법연구 가족법연구 제29권 제1호
발행연도
2015.3
수록면
201 - 264 (64page)

이용수

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

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The Discussion on legalizing same-sex marriage began about 20 years ago at the European level, but there’s no binding regulation to enforce the member states of EU or European Council to allow same sex marriage or civil union. Also the European court of Human Rights declared that the question whether or not to allow same-sex marriage is left to regulation by the national law of the Contracting State. The Court reiterates that it must not rush to substitute its own judgment about marriage in place of that of the national authorities, because marriage has deep-rooted social and cultural connotations which may differ largely from one society to another. But this statement doesn’t mean that the principle of non-discrimination on account of sexual orientation plays no role at the level of EU und European Council. For example European Court of Justice ruled that the refusal to grant the survivor’s pension to same-sex partners constitutes direct discrimination on grounds of sexual orientation. Also according to the recent judgement of ECtHR the margin of appreciation in relation to unequal treatment based on sex or sexual orientation is narrow, so that it must be shown that such a discriminatory measure was not merely suitable but necessary in order to achieve the aim sought. Based on this consideration ECtHR ruled that Greece had violated the European Convention on Human Rights by excluding same-sex couples from a civil union. In the meanwhile more and more European countries legalize same-sex marriage. Since Netherland legalized same-sex marriage in 2000 first in the world, 9 member states of EU and 11 Contracting states of European Council grant same-sex marriage. Among them especially England and France deserve further research and study in consideration of the important position which these states occupy in the EU and in comparative law study. In UK the Civil Partnership Act 2004 enabled same-sex couples to obtain legal recognition of their relationship by forming a civil partnership. Although CPA 2004 allowed to civil partners same rights and responsibilities as married couples in many areas including tax, social security, inheritance and workplace benefits, but some have argued that there are still differences in the perception of the two institutions and these arguments have been advanced that same sex couples should be able to marry. Worth noting is that the role of Courts which contribute traditionally to enhancing human rights was in developing the arguments for allowing same-sex marriage limited. In Wilkinson v. Kitzinger the High Court of Justice announced that the prohibition of same-sex marriage is no discrimination of European Convention of Human Rights, taking into consideration that English law already granted to homosexual couples to live in a very close, loving, and monogamous relationship. By contrast the government and parliament of England found it insufficient only to grant same-sex couples very similar legal position as that of conjugal couple. Also same-sex couple should be provided with the same opportunity to recognize that commitment in the valued institution of marriage In addition it was taken into account that the recognition of same-sex marriage will also get rid of some discriminatory differences between civil marriages and civil partnerships. Finally the Marriage (Same Sex Couple) Act 2013 enables same sex couples to marry, either in a civil ceremony or with the marriage being solemnized through a religious ceremony. But the legislator took caution not to compel religious organizations to conduct marriages for same sex couples, so same sex marriage ceremony on religious premises is permitted only when the religious organization consents. Under the previous French Code Civil, a marriage could only be between a man and a woman. But the legislation of the Pacs (Civil Union) in 1999 offered to the possibility to conclude a homosexual civil union. In comparison with the civil partnership of UK the French institution is open not only to homosexual but also to heterosexual couples. Whereas the CPA 2004 accords substantial equivalent legal position to same-sex couples the Pacs offers a much weaker version. Although the amendment of Pacs in 2006 reinforced the binding effects of this institution, the rate of same-sex couples entering into the Pacs to heterosexual couples has been reduced consistently. In fact the majority of couples taking advantage of Pacs are now heterosexual couples who choose civil union rather than marriage for one or another reason. For the heterosexual couples the weak binding effects of it are less of a concern, because they are awareness of it, nevertheless prefer Pacs to marriage. But homosexual couples have no alternative but Pacs, therefore it would constitute serious discrimination. In 2013 the French parliament adopted a law which grants same-sex couples the right to marry and jointly adopt children and Conseil constitutionnel upheld the constitutionality of this law. Interestingly also the French Courts including Conseil constitutionnel have previously restrained themselves from condemning the prohibition of same-sex marriage as a violation of the French Constitution and of ECHR. Such an attitude of the French Courts was based on the consideration that the value judgement of the legislator should not be replaced by the Courts. The Korean Civil Code and Family Register Act include no provision which limits eligibility for marriage to opposite sex couples. But Art. 36 (1) of Constitution of the Republic of Korea provides that marriage and family life shall be entered into and sustained on the basis of individual dignity and “gender equality”. The Wording “gender equality” shows that heterosexual marriage is the premise of the marriage institution guaranteed by the Korean Constitution. Because of constitutional supremacy all statutory laws should be interpreted in the light of the Constitution, so it’s not plausible that the same sex marriage in Korea could be permitted de lege lata. But this provision wouldn’t mean, in my opinion, that a legislative amendment recognizing relationships between same-sex couples is unconstitutional. First of all, civil union is a separate institution from marriage, as British and French legislators and German Constitutional Court declared several times. Also recognition of the same sex marriage doesn’t violate Art. 36 (1). The aim of this provision lies in removing irrational elements of the traditional patriarchal family law and in establishing the principles of human dignity and gender equality on the field of family law rather than in emphasizing that the marriage institution is limited to heterosexual marriage. Therefore same-sex relations could be recognized even without a constitutional amendment, if Korean legislator would find the recognition of same-sex marriage in Korea necessary.
#동성결합 #동성혼 합법화 #성적 지향을 이유로 한 차별금지 #유럽법 #유럽인권법원 #civil union #same-sex marriage #discrimination based on sexual orientation #european law #european court of human rights

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (38)

참고문헌 신청
김미경 / 2011 / 프랑스민법상 공동재산제 / 가족법연구 25(2):63~108 google schola 남효순 / 2003 / 프랑스民法상의 同居契約에 관한 硏究 / 서울대학교 法學 44(1):47 google schola 尹眞秀 / 1998 / 婚姻의 自由, 韓國 法學 50年 過去·現在·未來 / 제1회 韓國法學者大會 論文集 (Ⅱ) :60 google schola 尹眞秀 / 2001 / 婚姻 成立에 관한 民法의 改正方向 / 家族法硏究 15(1):73 google schola 이희배 / 1997 / 혼인·가족정책이념에 따른 동성동본혈족금혼규정의 헌법불합치결정 / 법률신문 google schola

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