국제재판관할의 체계적 지위에 관하여

On systematic position of international jurisdiction(Internationalen Zuständigkeit),the common opinion understand the limit of jurisdiction(Gerichtsbarkeit) is madeup with limits concerning subjects, objects and places, ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’is the limit of objects. The opposing opinion criticize that the common opiniondosen't distinguish between ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’ and ‘Gerichtsbarkeit’. But the concept that ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’ restrict ‘Gerichtsbarkeit’,premise ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’ is different from ‘Gerichtsbarkeit’ basically. The systematic position of ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’ in civil procedure lawis down to the concept setting up of ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’ and‘Gerichtsbarkeit’, the systematic position of state immunity․diplomatic immunityetc. eventually. ‘Gerichtsbarkeit’ is the power which the whole people as thesovereignty of a nation delegate authority to the courts. Therefore ‘Gerichtsbarkeit’is the concept about constitutional law which premise one sovereign nation. But ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’ is the issue respecting distribute ‘Gerichtsbarkeit’between nations, premising several nations. Therefore ‘InternationalenZuständigkeit’ is the concept about international law. In a view point of thehistory of state immunity and diplomatic immunity, ‘Capitulation’ and consularjurisdiction is divided into ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’ and diplomatic immunity. Both don't make large difference except by legal source. According to these grounds,the opinion that systematic position of ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’ and diplomaticimmunity are different on terms with ‘Gerichtsbarkeit’, is unreasonable. In itsfinal analysis, ‘Gerichtsbarkeit’, ‘Internationalen Zuständigkeit’ and state immunity․diplomatic immunity have the three staged structure.