关于在受款人行使撤销权时统一适用撤销申请和恢复原状申请的除斥期的必要性

Jun min Lee
{"title":"关于在受款人行使撤销权时统一适用撤销申请和恢复原状申请的除斥期的必要性","authors":"Jun min Lee","doi":"10.38133/cnulawreview.2023.43.4.211","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Under the Korean Civil Code, the obligee's right of revocation is characterized by the fact that only the plaintiff and the defendant have the effect of cancellation according to the theory of relative invalidity, and other creditors can also enjoy the effect of restoration. In addition, a short-term exclusion period is provided to minimize the liquidity condition caused by the exercise of the right to cancel. The precedent takes a position to consider a request for restoration in determining the scope of cancellation of a fraudulent act. Under this premise, once a request for cancellation is made, the beneficiary will be in an unstable position for a long time if the limit of the exclusion period is not applied to the request for restoration. This is not consistent with the purpose of our creditor revocation system, and it is difficult to agree with the attitude of the target judgment in that only creditors can make various choices, giving creditors an edge over bene- ficiaries, and infringing on relative invalidity and creditor egalitarianism. It would be most desirable to resolve this legislatively, but the current civil law amendment does not include this. It may be possible to consider a solution that requires the merger of cancellation claims and restoration claims, and a plan to specify the scope of the exclusion period. And even before the revision of the Civil Code, the attitude of the target judgment needs to be changed through a change in precedent.","PeriodicalId":288398,"journal":{"name":"Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University","volume":"169 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Regarding the Necessity of Unified Application of the Exclusion Period for the Request for Cancellation and the Request for Restoration in the Exercise of Obligee's Right of Revocation\",\"authors\":\"Jun min Lee\",\"doi\":\"10.38133/cnulawreview.2023.43.4.211\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Under the Korean Civil Code, the obligee's right of revocation is characterized by the fact that only the plaintiff and the defendant have the effect of cancellation according to the theory of relative invalidity, and other creditors can also enjoy the effect of restoration. In addition, a short-term exclusion period is provided to minimize the liquidity condition caused by the exercise of the right to cancel. The precedent takes a position to consider a request for restoration in determining the scope of cancellation of a fraudulent act. Under this premise, once a request for cancellation is made, the beneficiary will be in an unstable position for a long time if the limit of the exclusion period is not applied to the request for restoration. This is not consistent with the purpose of our creditor revocation system, and it is difficult to agree with the attitude of the target judgment in that only creditors can make various choices, giving creditors an edge over bene- ficiaries, and infringing on relative invalidity and creditor egalitarianism. It would be most desirable to resolve this legislatively, but the current civil law amendment does not include this. It may be possible to consider a solution that requires the merger of cancellation claims and restoration claims, and a plan to specify the scope of the exclusion period. And even before the revision of the Civil Code, the attitude of the target judgment needs to be changed through a change in precedent.\",\"PeriodicalId\":288398,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University\",\"volume\":\"169 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.38133/cnulawreview.2023.43.4.211\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Institute for Legal Studies Chonnam National University","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.38133/cnulawreview.2023.43.4.211","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

根据《韩国民法典》,义务人撤销权的特点是,根据相对无效理论,只有原告和被告具有撤销权的效力,其他债权人也可以享有恢复原状的效力。此外,还规定了短期的除斥期间,以尽量减少因行使撤销权而造成的流动性状况。判例采取的立场是,在确定欺诈行为的取消范围时考虑恢复原状请求。 在这一前提下,一旦提出取消请求,如果对恢复原状请求不适用免责期的限制,受益人将长期处于不稳定状态。这不符合我国债权人撤销权制度的宗旨,也难以认同判决对象的态度,即只有债权人才能做出各种选择,使债权人比受益人更有优势,有违相对无效主义和债权人平等主义。最理想的是通过立法来解决这个问题,但目前的民法修正案并不包括这一点。或许可以考虑取消债权和恢复原状债权合并的方案,以及明确规定除斥期间范围的方案。甚至在修订《民法典》之前,也需要通过改变先例来改变目标判决的态度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Regarding the Necessity of Unified Application of the Exclusion Period for the Request for Cancellation and the Request for Restoration in the Exercise of Obligee's Right of Revocation
Under the Korean Civil Code, the obligee's right of revocation is characterized by the fact that only the plaintiff and the defendant have the effect of cancellation according to the theory of relative invalidity, and other creditors can also enjoy the effect of restoration. In addition, a short-term exclusion period is provided to minimize the liquidity condition caused by the exercise of the right to cancel. The precedent takes a position to consider a request for restoration in determining the scope of cancellation of a fraudulent act. Under this premise, once a request for cancellation is made, the beneficiary will be in an unstable position for a long time if the limit of the exclusion period is not applied to the request for restoration. This is not consistent with the purpose of our creditor revocation system, and it is difficult to agree with the attitude of the target judgment in that only creditors can make various choices, giving creditors an edge over bene- ficiaries, and infringing on relative invalidity and creditor egalitarianism. It would be most desirable to resolve this legislatively, but the current civil law amendment does not include this. It may be possible to consider a solution that requires the merger of cancellation claims and restoration claims, and a plan to specify the scope of the exclusion period. And even before the revision of the Civil Code, the attitude of the target judgment needs to be changed through a change in precedent.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信