유치권의 문제점과 개정 법률안에 대한 소고

The proposition presented as a solution to the problems of the right of retention was a tentative bill. Although, ultimately, the right to retention for immovable property should be abolished, it cannot be abolished immediately considering the circumstances of Korea. Therefore, while the unregistered immovable property is exceptionally recognized only to be abolished, the existing right of retention is intended to alleviate the impact through the system of claiming the right to demand the creation of mortgage. It is the best choice as an eclectic measure. The transition from the principle of acquisition to the principle of extinction is also an important change. There have been various criticisms in terms of differences in perspective and in the judiciary on the proposition, which have sought a lot of changes. This proposition has the advantages and disadvantages of the blades on both sides, like the general legal system, so it is necessary to make legislative policy judgments to decide profits by comparison. Many criticisms, along with specific analysis on the proposition which was abolished in the 19th National Assembly), are useful research results. It is thought to be the right time to adopt a new legislative bill by accepting the legislative bill proposed and these criticisms. Since many research results have accumulated over the years, it is believed that the right of retention can be revised more rationally in the 20th National Assembly if we take advantage of these results. However, since there are so many oppositions from stakeholders such as the construction industry, the process of collecting opinions from all stakeholders as much as possible should be gone through again. It is considered very difficult to prepare a proposition to satisfy all of them. However, I think that it is necessary to make a decisive legislative decision because it cannot be tolerated and overlooked that the phenomenon in which the system of the right of retention is distorted or neutralized.