EUROPEAN TRENDS IN THE LAW ON UNJUSTIFIED ENRICHMENT - FROM THE GERMAN PERSPECTIVE = EUROPEAN TRENDS IN THE LAW ON UNJUSTIFIED ENRICHMENT - FROM THE GERMAN PERSPECTIVE
저자
발행기관
학술지명
권호사항
발행연도
2013
작성언어
-주제어
KDC
300
자료형태
학술저널
수록면
43-59(17쪽)
제공처
The striving for enrichment lies in the nature of human beings. It is legitimate to enrich oneself if an enrichment does not get out of control and violate the legal order. If the enrichment is unjustified, a statutory compensation code will apply. There is disagreement in Europe about the best way to reverse unjustified enrichments. The origins of unjustified enrichment law lie in Roman law: the Pandects contain in two places the statement by the Roman jurist Pomponius that according to the laws of nature, no one may enrich himself to the detriment of another. At the beginning of the nineteenth century, Carl Friedrich von Savigny established a dogma of condictiones that was based on a unified definition of unjustified enrichment. In his view, the common feature, and at the same time the underlying principle of all condictiones, could be found in shifts in wealth without a legal basis. The German Civil Code contains a general provision: A person who obtains something as a result of the performance of another person or otherwise at his expense without legal basis for doing so is under a duty to make restitution to him. Immediately following this provision, individual cases are regulated in sections 812 (1) sentence 2 to 817 BGB, specifying particular forms which a lack of legal basis can take and describing their specific manifestations. Once the German Civil Code entered into force on 1 January 1900, in accordance with the conceptions of the legislators, it was agreed that the codification in section 812 (1) sentence 1 BGB contained a general unified rule governing unjustified enrichment. It was assumed that its alternatively formulated definition of unjustified enrichment as a result of the performance of another person or otherwise merely described the two conceivable enrichment procedures that would lead to a shift in wealth. Since the 1930``s, the voices critical of the legislative concept of unjustified enrichment law has grown in number. Their basic thesis is that a unified principle of reversal under unjustified enrichment law cannot be derived from the legislative concept underlying sections 812 et seq. BGB. A distinction was made between enrichment based on performance and enrichment by other means, which were essentially of a completely different character. The first independent group of condictiones was based on a specific use of the term performance (Leistung) under unjustified enrichment law. The term performance represents the conscious and goal-oriented increase of the assets of another. The condictiones by other means are to be attributed to the second category. Thus, even things that did not enter into the assets of another due to the intention of the performer, but which the other person obtained at the expense of another due to his action or other circumstances ? such as deprivation, use, consumption, processing, and disposition ? would also be actionable. First and foremost among the non-performance condictiones, which are not defined separately in the law, is the condictio of interference with another``s rights, which has as its subject matter the encroachment on an asset which is allocated to the enrichment-creditor by the legal system and thus is protected by law. The legal consequence of such encroachment is the restitution of the benefit the enrichment-debtor obtained through the interference. The focal point of the question of whether one will be allowed to retain assets or must return them is the legal basis for the enrichment, the causa, which determines whether the enrichment is justified. If a shift in wealth falls under the category of performance condictiones, it has no legal basis if it did not lead to the fulfilment of an obligation of the disadvantaged person. If the shift in wealth consisted of a removal, use, consumption, processing or disposition ? at the expense of another ? it has no legal basis if the enrichment-debtor has interfered with a legal position allocated to the owner, or the holder of another absolutely protected right, without being legally entitled to the benefit derived therefrom. The Principles of European Law (PEL) on unjustified enrichment law build on the concept of a unified basic rule. The authors of the PEL saw no compelling reason to distinguish between performance and interference condictiones. The basic rule contains four prerequisites and reads as follows: A person who obtains an unjustified enrichment which is attributable to another``s disadvantage is obliged to that other to reverse the enrichment. In the basic rule ? Art. 2:101 paragraph (1) ? an enrichment is generally presumed to be unjustified. Paragraph (1) (a) and (b) then sets out circumstances that justify an enrichment. An enrichment is justified pursuant to subparagraph (a) if the enriched person is entitled as against the disadvantaged person to the enrichment by virtue of a contract or other juridical act, a court order or a rule of law. Pursuant to paragraph (1) (b), an enrichment is also justified if the disadvantaged person consented freely and without error to the disadvantage.
더보기서지정보 내보내기(Export)
닫기소장기관 정보
닫기권호소장정보
닫기오류접수
닫기오류 접수 확인
닫기음성서비스 신청
닫기음성서비스 신청 확인
닫기이용약관
닫기학술연구정보서비스 이용약관 (2017년 1월 1일 ~ 현재 적용)
학술연구정보서비스(이하 RISS)는 정보주체의 자유와 권리 보호를 위해 「개인정보 보호법」 및 관계 법령이 정한 바를 준수하여, 적법하게 개인정보를 처리하고 안전하게 관리하고 있습니다. 이에 「개인정보 보호법」 제30조에 따라 정보주체에게 개인정보 처리에 관한 절차 및 기준을 안내하고, 이와 관련한 고충을 신속하고 원활하게 처리할 수 있도록 하기 위하여 다음과 같이 개인정보 처리방침을 수립·공개합니다.
주요 개인정보 처리 표시(라벨링)
목 차
3년
또는 회원탈퇴시까지5년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한3년
(「전자상거래 등에서의 소비자보호에 관한2년
이상(개인정보보호위원회 : 개인정보의 안전성 확보조치 기준)개인정보파일의 명칭 | 운영근거 / 처리목적 | 개인정보파일에 기록되는 개인정보의 항목 | 보유기간 | |
---|---|---|---|---|
학술연구정보서비스 이용자 가입정보 파일 | 한국교육학술정보원법 | 필수 | ID, 비밀번호, 성명, 생년월일, 신분(직업구분), 이메일, 소속분야, 웹진메일 수신동의 여부 | 3년 또는 탈퇴시 |
선택 | 소속기관명, 소속도서관명, 학과/부서명, 학번/직원번호, 휴대전화, 주소 |
구분 | 담당자 | 연락처 |
---|---|---|
KERIS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 정보보호본부 김태우 | - 이메일 : lsy@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0439 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0195 |
KERIS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 개인정보보호부 이상엽 | |
RISS 개인정보 보호책임자 | 대학학술본부 장금연 | - 이메일 : giltizen@keris.or.kr - 전화번호 : 053-714-0149 - 팩스번호 : 053-714-0194 |
RISS 개인정보 보호담당자 | 학술진흥부 길원진 |
자동로그아웃 안내
닫기인증오류 안내
닫기귀하께서는 휴면계정 전환 후 1년동안 회원정보 수집 및 이용에 대한
재동의를 하지 않으신 관계로 개인정보가 삭제되었습니다.
(참조 : RISS 이용약관 및 개인정보처리방침)
신규회원으로 가입하여 이용 부탁 드리며, 추가 문의는 고객센터로 연락 바랍니다.
- 기존 아이디 재사용 불가
휴면계정 안내
RISS는 [표준개인정보 보호지침]에 따라 2년을 주기로 개인정보 수집·이용에 관하여 (재)동의를 받고 있으며, (재)동의를 하지 않을 경우, 휴면계정으로 전환됩니다.
(※ 휴면계정은 원문이용 및 복사/대출 서비스를 이용할 수 없습니다.)
휴면계정으로 전환된 후 1년간 회원정보 수집·이용에 대한 재동의를 하지 않을 경우, RISS에서 자동탈퇴 및 개인정보가 삭제처리 됩니다.
고객센터 1599-3122
ARS번호+1번(회원가입 및 정보수정)