애스크로AIPublic Preview
← 학술논문 검색
학술논문가족법연구2010.07 발행KCI 피인용 25

이혼급부에 대한 검토 ―재산분할, 부양료, 위자료 청구의 개별적 근거―

Study on Divorce Payment

이홍민(고려대학교)

24권 2호, 33~60쪽

초록

When examining the contents of payments intended to be requested by a divorcee to the person they are divorcing, it is mostly composed of alimony from ① liquidating property, ② living expenses subsequential to the divorce, and ③ mental anguish due to the divorce. Among these contents, ① and ③ proves a definite basis since ① is abided by the claim for dividing property (under Civil Code Article 839-2 and Article 843), ③ is abided by the indemnities claims for mental damages (under Civil Code Article 843, Article 806 clause 2). However, ② does not have a clear legal basis, therefore, the discussion was arranged by the historic precedents and their process of development, or occasionally involved in the alimony or the claim for division of property. However, because alimony and claim for division of property was included for the basis of support payment, it resulted in the problem with having ambiguities in the nature of the claim for division of property or alimony. In this paper, the historical development of the legal regulations related to divorce payments are examined in order to reveal the reasons of indemnities claims or claim for division of property that are the basis for support payment after divorce (II). Then, claims for division of property due to legal divorce are proven to be a system for not of paying support payment but for ‘settlement’ (III. 1.). Also, it reveals that alimony from divorce is based on the fact that it is of a violation of the marriage contract (III. 2.). Based on these points, support payment after divorce is based on the violation of contingent rights for duty of supporting expenses pursuant to the marriage contract, and by revealing that it is based on the indemnities claims (Civil Code Article 843 and Article 806 clause 1) of properties (III. 3.), the basis and range of the three divorce payments are explicated respectively.

Abstract

When examining the contents of payments intended to be requested by a divorcee to the person they are divorcing, it is mostly composed of alimony from ① liquidating property, ② living expenses subsequential to the divorce, and ③ mental anguish due to the divorce. Among these contents, ① and ③ proves a definite basis since ① is abided by the claim for dividing property (under Civil Code Article 839-2 and Article 843), ③ is abided by the indemnities claims for mental damages (under Civil Code Article 843, Article 806 clause 2). However, ② does not have a clear legal basis, therefore, the discussion was arranged by the historic precedents and their process of development, or occasionally involved in the alimony or the claim for division of property. However, because alimony and claim for division of property was included for the basis of support payment, it resulted in the problem with having ambiguities in the nature of the claim for division of property or alimony. In this paper, the historical development of the legal regulations related to divorce payments are examined in order to reveal the reasons of indemnities claims or claim for division of property that are the basis for support payment after divorce (II). Then, claims for division of property due to legal divorce are proven to be a system for not of paying support payment but for ‘settlement’ (III. 1.). Also, it reveals that alimony from divorce is based on the fact that it is of a violation of the marriage contract (III. 2.). Based on these points, support payment after divorce is based on the violation of contingent rights for duty of supporting expenses pursuant to the marriage contract, and by revealing that it is based on the indemnities claims (Civil Code Article 843 and Article 806 clause 1) of properties (III. 3.), the basis and range of the three divorce payments are explicated respectively.

발행기관:
한국가족법학회
분류:
법학

AI 법률 상담

이 논문의 주제에 대해 더 알고 싶으신가요?

460만+ 법률 자료에서 관련 판례·법령·해석례를 찾아 답변합니다

AI 상담 시작
이혼급부에 대한 검토 ―재산분할, 부양료, 위자료 청구의 개별적 근거― | 가족법연구 2010 | AskLaw | 애스크로 AI