KCI등재후보
後發的ㆍ豫備的ㆍ選擇的 共同訴訟에 관한 검토 = The Addition of Preliminary or Selective Co-Litigation
저자
김상균 (청주대학교)
발행기관
학술지명
권호사항
발행연도
2008
작성언어
Korean
주제어
등재정보
KCI등재후보
자료형태
학술저널
수록면
79-122(44쪽)
KCI 피인용횟수
1
제공처
소장기관
Article 70 (Preliminary or Selective Co-Litigation) of the Korean Civil Procedure Act was revised in 2002. The Purpose of legislation for the Article 70 is that the legally incompatible litigations of the parties should be solved consistently in one action. The Preliminary Co-Litigation means that the legally incompatible claims by or against the prime party and the preliminary party are tried together and to be solved consistently in one action. If the judgement is in the prime party’s favor, the judgement to the preliminary party should be unfavorable, and adversely. The Selective Co-Litigation is that the legally incompatible claims by or against the parties will be judged selectively in a different way of the Preliminary Co-Litigation. If the judgement is given for one claim, the other claim should not win a lawsuit.
* Professor, College of Law, Cheongju University.To be solved consistently in one action, Article 70 requires the application of Article 67 (Special Provisions for Indispensable Co-Litigation) mutatis mutandis to its trial. Therefore, procedural action taken by anyone of the co-litigants shall be effective only for the benefits of all such co-litigants, while the procedural actions taken by the counter party against one of the co-litigants shall be effective against all of them. In cases where there exists any cause for interruption or suspension of litigation procedures to one of the co-litigants, such interruption or suspension shall be effective against all co-litigants. But it does not apply to the case of waiver or recognition of the claim, compromise between the parties, and the withdrawal of the lawsuit. The reason why each co-litigants of Article 70 can close his or her lawsuit individually is that the claims of Preliminary or Selective Co-Litigation have not to be got together legally in one action or the judgements for the parties are not supposed to be legally effective on each other. Article 70 claims are legally incompatible to one another, but the ones of the Article 67 are legally compatible. On the basis of the difference between the two co-litigations, we should have an interpretation to the meaning of the application for the Article 67. The Admission of one of the co-litigants before the judge in a trial is particularly to be handled with differently in two co-litigations. The Admission of one of the co-litigants is generally not effective to the other co-parties in an action of the Article 67 and will accordingly be void as a whole. It is due to adverse to the co-litigants. On the other hand, in an action of the Article 70 the admission of one party can have an effect on the other co-parties who are able to get an advantage in their trial itself.
Also the Article 70 provides to apply the Article 68(Addition of Indispensable Co-Litigants) mutatis mutandis. A plaintiff is able to add any persons to his or her trial court who are not parties yet, and make them to be preliminary parties or selective parties on his or her side or on the other side. According to the process of the action, a plaintiff can resolve the litigations connected legally with the already parties and the third to have brought in one action. The procedural materials from the already parties to the court can be used to decide on the claim by or against the new party to be added, if he invokes these materials to be favorable for him. Otherwise the court should take the processes of the action from day one on the claim of the new party. After adding the new party, the Article 67 shall apply.
Parties may assign their claims or obligations during the action(Article 81, 82). When a third person has succeeded to the whole or part of the right or obligation which is the object of lawsuit, while the lawsuit is pending before the court, the plaintiff is able to bring in him or her to be a preliminary or selective party. The successor can also intervene to be a preliminary or selective party on his own name. After adding the ...
Article 70 (Preliminary or Selective Co-Litigation) of the Korean Civil Procedure Act was revised in 2002. The Purpose of legislation for the Article 70 is that the legally incompatible litigations of the parties should be solved consistently in one action. The Preliminary Co-Litigation means that the legally incompatible claims by or against the prime party and the preliminary party are tried together and to be solved consistently in one action. If the judgement is in the prime party’s favor, the judgement to the preliminary party should be unfavorable, and adversely. The Selective Co-Litigation is that the legally incompatible claims by or against the parties will be judged selectively in a different way of the Preliminary Co-Litigation. If the judgement is given for one claim, the other claim should not win a lawsuit.
* Professor, College of Law, Cheongju University.To be solved consistently in one action, Article 70 requires the application of Article 67 (Special Provisions for Indispensable Co-Litigation) mutatis mutandis to its trial. Therefore, procedural action taken by anyone of the co-litigants shall be effective only for the benefits of all such co-litigants, while the procedural actions taken by the counter party against one of the co-litigants shall be effective against all of them. In cases where there exists any cause for interruption or suspension of litigation procedures to one of the co-litigants, such interruption or suspension shall be effective against all co-litigants. But it does not apply to the case of waiver or recognition of the claim, compromise between the parties, and the withdrawal of the lawsuit. The reason why each co-litigants of Article 70 can close his or her lawsuit individually is that the claims of Preliminary or Selective Co-Litigation have not to be got together legally in one action or the judgements for the parties are not supposed to be legally effective on each other. Article 70 claims are legally incompatible to one another, but the ones of the Article 67 are legally compatible. On the basis of the difference between the two co-litigations, we should have an interpretation to the meaning of the application for the Article 67. The Admission of one of the co-litigants before the judge in a trial is particularly to be handled with differently in two co-litigations. The Admission of one of the co-litigants is generally not effective to the other co-parties in an action of the Article 67 and will accordingly be void as a whole. It is due to adverse to the co-litigants. On the other hand, in an action of the Article 70 the admission of one party can have an effect on the other co-parties who are able to get an advantage in their trial itself.
Also the Article 70 provides to apply the Article 68(Addition of Indispensable Co-Litigants) mutatis mutandis. A plaintiff is able to add any persons to his or her trial court who are not parties yet, and make them to be preliminary parties or selective parties on his or her side or on the other side. According to the process of the action, a plaintiff can resolve the litigations connected legally with the already parties and the third to have brought in one action. The procedural materials from the already parties to the court can be used to decide on the claim by or against the new party to be added, if he invokes these materials to be favorable for him. Otherwise the court should take the processes of the action from day one on the claim of the new party. After adding the new party, the Article 67 shall apply.
Parties may assign their claims or obligations during the action(Article 81, 82). When a third person has succeeded to the whole or part of the right or obligation which is the object of lawsuit, while the lawsuit is pending before the court, the plaintiff is able to bring in him or her to be a preliminary or selective party. The successor can also intervene to be a preliminary or selective party on his own name. After adding the suc...
분석정보
연월일 | 이력구분 | 이력상세 | 등재구분 |
---|---|---|---|
2022 | 평가예정 | 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증) | |
2019-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) | KCI등재 |
2016-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) | KCI등재 |
2012-01-01 | 평가 | 등재 1차 FAIL (등재유지) | KCI등재 |
2009-01-01 | 평가 | 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) | KCI등재 |
2008-01-01 | 평가 | 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) | KCI후보 |
2006-01-01 | 평가 | 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) | KCI후보 |
기준연도 | WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) | KCIF(2년) | KCIF(3년) |
---|---|---|---|
2016 | 1.14 | 1.14 | 1.17 |
KCIF(4년) | KCIF(5년) | 중심성지수(3년) | 즉시성지수 |
1.05 | 0.94 | 1.239 | 0.25 |
서지정보 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)