상린관계에 관한 연구 ― 민법개정안을 중심으로 ― = A Study on the Law of Neighborly Relationship in Korea ― Focused on the Reform-Proposal-Act of Korean Civil Code ―

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The diverse uses of land and the changes in its uses provide power for the development of our society. It’s most closely related ‘Regulations about neighborly relationship in Korean Civil Code(KCC)’ are also an area of law where inflows and changes of various values very actively take place.
There is a proverb that a neighbor is so good as a cousin. If we want to live together, we have to adjust ourself to and accept the normal use of the land. Along with the development of the living area, it’s usual use of land is also changing. It is always possible that a residential area changes to commercial one and a commercial area to factory as much as a residential area becomes factory. The original usage of land and it’s present use of the land can be changed. The world is changing really breathlessly. In any case, it is necessary to more actively regulate the law of neighborly relationship according to the principle of ‘mutual consideration’ and ‘mutual endurance,’ and expand its scope of application. This is because the type and form of life and the cases of conflicts in neighborly relationship have also diversified.
The law of neighborly relationship where elements of public and private law are quite mixes seeks the order of coexistence and the balancing of the public and private interests. It contains a relatively dynamic element also within the property law. The contents and limitations of ownership are not absolutely fixed. In the case of land ownership, there are cases where environmental harmonization is required depending on the actual usages of adjacent land and we can’t miss that the public interests such as environmental benefit become more and more evident and important.
The neighborly-relationship-related regulations outside the KCC should partly be introduced into the KCC and the law of neighborly relationship in KCC should be a model for the peaceful coexistence order of neighboring people. Introducing of regulations about the division ownership into KCC wiil not be that simple. However, considering the overwhelming type of housing(appartement) today, it is reasonable to prepare corresponding regulations in KCC. It will be not easy to coordinate the scopes of appliances with the relevant laws, but legislation as an effort to understand and solve the real problems of society is a process of creative choice. I think that the choice to implement the norms conforming to the reality type within the civil law, not outside the civil law, also requires a creative decision. And the driving force behind the path of creation is the accumulated accomplishments of jurisprudence of civil law in korea.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 정진명, "환경오염피해에 대한 사법적 구제 – 위험책임의 입장에서" 21 : 1999
• 2 정종휴, "한국민법전의 비교법적 검토" (8) : 1990
• 3 박흥대, "판례연구1" 부산판례연구회 1991
• 4 김정현, "입합주택(아파트)의 소유, 관리에 관한 고찰(그 입법화와 관련한 문제점과 방향)" (1) : 1974
• 5 윤용석, "위험책임의 일반조항에 관한 일고찰 – 1982년 Kötz교수의 개정입법안을중심으로 한 검토" 부산대학교 법학연구소 28 (28):
• 6 법제처, "알기 쉬운 법령 정비기준" 2009
• 7 김재형, "소유권과 환경보호 – 민법 제217조의 의미와 기능에 대한 검토를 중심으로" (276) : 1999
• 8 전경운, "상린관계에 관한 민법개정논의" 한국토지법학회 28 (28): 171-204, 2012
• 9 권영준, "민법학, 개인과 공동체, 그리고 법원" 한국비교사법학회 22 (22): 1401-1478, 2015
• 10 백태승, "민법총칙(제7판)" 집현재 2016
• 11 곽윤직, "민법주해 V" 박영사 1992
• 12 양창수, "민법연구" 박영사 1994
• 13 "민법안심의록(상권)" 1957
• 14 김재형, "민법론 Ⅰ" 박영사 2004
• 15 황적인, "민법개정안의견서"
• 16 지원림, "민법강의" 홍문사 2017
• 17 "민법(재산편)개정공청회 자료집, 2001. 12"
• 18 정병호, "민법 개정안 제242의 2에 관한 연구" 한국재산법학회 22 (22): 37-83, 2005
• 19 이은영, "물권법의 개정방향" (17) : 1999
• 20 김재형, "물권법 개정에 관한 의견" (377) : 2002
• 21 곽윤직, "물권법 : 민법강의 II" 박영사 [서울] 2015
• 22 김준호, "물권법" 법문사 2017
• 23 윤진수, "물권법" fides [서울] 2009
• 24 송덕수, "물권법" 박영사 2017
• 25 이재성, "당사자의 교대와 무상주위지통행권"
• 26 양창수, "권리의 변동과 구제(민법2)" 박영사 2017
• 27 전경운, "경계를 침범한 건축" 한국비교사법학회 19 (19): 875-910, 2012
• 28 內田貴, "民法I(補정판) 總則ㆍ物權總論" 2003
• 29 川島武宜, "新版 注釋民法(7), 物權(2)" 2007
• 30 최봉경, "周圍土地通行權 行使의 限界 ― 대법원 2009.6.11. 선고 2008다75300, 75317, 75324 판결을 중심으로 ―" 민사판례연구회 (33) : 233-274, 2011
• 31 "http://data.seoul.go.kr/openinf/linkview.jsp?infId=OA-12592"
• 32 Jauernig, "Zivilrechtlicher Schutz des Grundeigentums in der neueren Rechtsprechung" 605-, 1986
• 33 Fikentscher, "Schuldrecht" 2006
• 34 Larenz, "SchR II/2"
• 35 Westermann, Harry, "Sachenrecht" 1966
• 36 "Palandt" 2011
• 37 Bensching, "Nachbarrechtliche Ausgleichsansprüche – zulässige Rechtsfortbildung oder Rechtsprechung contra legem?" 2002
• 38 "Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch" 2004
• 39 "Motive III(=Mugdan III)"
• 40 Larenz, "Methodenlehre der Rechtswissenschaft" 1995
• 41 Bamberger, "Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch" 2015
• 42 Kramer, Ernst A., "Juristische Methodenlehre"
• 43 Kötz, "Gutachten und Vorschläge zur Überarbeitung des Schuldrechts, Bd. II" 1981
• 44 Kastner, "Entschädigung wegen Strassenverkehrslärm - Anwendungsbereich undBedeutung von §42 BImSchG" 2319-, 1975
• 45 Westermann, Harry, "Die Funktion des Nachbarrechts: Zugleich eine Untersuchung der Bedeutung eines Immissionsschutzgesetzes für das Privatrecht" 1973
• 46 "BGB-Kommentar Erman" 2004
• 47 Staudinger, "BGB-Kommentar"
• 48 "2004년 민법(재산편) 개정자료집 I"