초록 열기/닫기 버튼
법률의 규정에 의한 물권변동은 등기명의와 일치하지 않는 물권귀속을 초래하기 때문에 거래안전을 저해할 가능성이 있다. 그런데도 제187조에는 이런 상황에 대처하기 위한 규정이 마련되어 있지 않다. 입법과정에서의 논의를 보면 제186조에 대해서는 실질적인 검토가 이루어졌으나 제187조에 대해서는 성립요건주의를 채택한 외국 입법례 반영 이외의 구체적인 입법이유를 찾아보기 어렵다. 그렇지만 이런 제187조의 규정방식은 입법자가 등기명의를 신뢰한 제3자 보호를 포기한 적극적 결단이 반영된 것이라고 단정할 수는 없다. 상속등기를 신뢰한 제3자 보호를 위한 해석론적 대안으로서 보호가치의 비교형량을 통해 제3자를 보호하는 방법을 생각해 볼 수 있다. 이미 우리 판례는 전득자가 상속회복청구권이나 유류분반환청구권의 상대방이 될 수 있는지의 여부가 문제된 사례에서 이런 방법을 활용하고 있다. 따라서 위의 사안들 뿐 아니라 법정상속분에 따른 상속등기와 실제 상속권이 일치하지 않는 사안 전반에 대해 제3자와 진정상속인의 보호가치를 비교형량을 통해 제3자 보호를 시도할 필요가 있다.
Registration according to inheritance shall be applied unilaterally by a person entitled to file for a registration. Even if there are two or more inheritos, each inheritor can unilaterally apply register according to his/her share in inheritance because the inherited property shall belong to those heirs in co-ownership. This system may cause cases where the contents of the registration and actual rights do not coincide. For example, a inheritor who has already registered his share can becomes disqualified(Civil Act Article 1004). In other case, co-inheritors may, at any time, effect the division of the inherited property by their agreement, and it shall be effective retroactively from the time of the commencement of the inheritance(Civil Act Article 1015). What makes matters worse is that a registrar is authorized to review only formal aspect of application of registration, so he/she cannot examine these factors that may cause discordance. In these cases, the person who has the right of inheritance or his/her legal representative may bring an action for recovery of inheritance to a person who has acquired property from apparent inheritor without knowledge of the discrepancy. But this situation may cause confusion in the transaction of inherited property. To cope with this problem two alternatives need to be examined. First, we may consider introducing the principle of Requisite for Setting up Assignment. For example, in Japan, acquisitions of, losses of and changes in real rights concerning immovable properties may not be asserted against third parties(Japanese Civil Code Article 177). Second, if a person was assigned a property in good faith and without negligence, we may grant acquisition of ownership immediately even if the assigner is not a legal owner. But current law has no provision reflection these alternatives. So the aim of these alternatives should be realized thorough interpretation until the Civil Act is to be amended to explicitly introduce any of these alternatives.
키워드열기/닫기 버튼
The acquisition of real rights over immovables through inheritance, Requirements of Perfection of Changes in Real Rights concerning Immovable properties, bona fide Acquisition, Statutory Share in Inheritance, Division of inherited property
