공동저당의 배당에 관한 연구

Metadata Downloads
Issued Date
공동저당, 배당

A Study on the Dividend of Joint Mortgage

Rieu, Hong-Gyou
Advisor: Prof. Kim, Bum-Chul, Ph. D
Department of Law
Graduate School of Chosun University

The Civil Code has been developed by continually expanding the scope of mortgage in order to respond to the constantly changing economic development and to increase the possibility of applying the mortgage system. In particular, the Civil Code recognizes a common mortgage, which is set up with a number of real estate properties that can be set up as mortgages in order to secure the same receivables in case that the collateral value of the real estate does not match the amount of the counterclaimed receivables. In Korea, land and buildings are separate real estate, and the collateral value of land subdivided by parcel is so low that it is very difficult to give and take credit as a single real estate.
Therefore, the joint mortgage system is more commonly used than the general mortgage because its usability is great in many fields of society because of its advantages such as it has easier credibility through the accumulation of collateral and it can disperse the risk of reducing the collateral value coming from the damage and destruction of the object. In case of a joint mortgage, a creditor may freely choose a part of a number of properties that are the objects of a joint mortgage, so that some or all of the bond may be reimbursed first.
By the way, as a result of free choice, because the unfairness may arise in between the holders of the object or to the subordinated mortgagee, the Civil Code sets up Article 368 of the Civil Code to adjust the interests with the subordinated mortgagee and to extend the value of the mortgage value which may arise as a result of free choice. However, it is not enough in many ways that the Korean Civil Code has only Article 368 in order to solve the problem in the joint mortgage where various problems may concretely arise. This regulation is a criterion for the important interpretation in the joint mortgage, but as many theories conflict on the interpretation of this regulation, and the precedent cases do not disclose the position on all matters that may arise, it is said that they have various interpretational problems.
Therefore, this paper studies on the dividend of joint mortgage by checking the applied scope and nature of Article 368 of the Civil Code and the legal nature of the subrogation rights of subordinate mortgage lenders through theories, precedents, and cases to solve various legal problems arising from the legal structure that joint mortgages are set on several real properties, and furthermore, it suggests the improvement plan through the interpretation in the part where there is a gap of law. In the requirements for the formation of a joint mortgage, there are some problems typically in the object of a joint mortgage, the identity of a secured bond, and the registration portion of a joint mortgage. In the case of a heterogeneous object, whether it applies Article 368 of the Civil Code or not is problematic. However, according to the economic development, since the scope of the object of the mortgage right has been expanded, if it is possible to establish a general mortgage right. it is also true to establish in between heterogeneous objects.
In order for the secured claim to be the same, the creditor and the debtor should be the same for several securities, and the cause and coverage of the bond should be the same. If the scope of the collateral is not the same, rather than denying its existence, it would be in accordance with the purpose of the system to recognize the joint mortgage within the overlapped scope if the cause of the bond is the same as the related party. There is a confrontation in between the theories on whether the registration of a joint mortgage is required or not. That is because in the mortgage there is no particular reason for registering a joint mortgage, nor does it require a separate registration as a requirement for the formation of a joint mortgage in the law or document. The dividend of the joint mortgage can be divided into the simultaneous dividend and the different dividend. When distributing the auctioned value at the same time by auctioning each real estate simultaneously that is the object of the joint mortgage, the Civil Code sets up the share of the security bond in proportion to the auction price of each real estate (Article 368 Item 1 of Civil Code).
However, if a joint mortgagee auctions only a specific property among the objects of a joint mortgage and receives the first dividend at the auction price, the entire amount of the bond may be reimbursed from the proceeds. In this case, the subordinated mortgagee in the auctioned specific real estate may exercise its mortgage for the joint mortgage lender in the amount that would have been borne by another property if the joint mortgagee had been paid at the same time (Article 368 Item 2 of the Civil Code). This is to protect the subordinate mortgagee from being unfairly disadvantaged(subrogation rights of subordinated mortgage holders).
If all or a part of real estate that is the object of a joint mortgage belongs to a person other than the debtor, that is, the guarantor(hereunder indicating the person who has pledged his/her property to secure another's obligation) of the third party or the third acquirer, conflicts arise between the subrogation of subordinate and that of subordinate mortgagees, and in this case, the priority is important. In the case, theories are confronted, and in case of the precedent, the subrogation by a person who has performed obligation has the priority. However, since the guarantor or the third acquirer is interpreted as having to bear the amount of the secured claim in proportion to the value of the objects of the joint mortgage, it is not necessary to protect even under the exclusion of the application of Article 368 Item 2 and not protecting them would be consistent with the intent of Article 368 Item 2 of the Civil Code to make full use of the collateral value of each property, which is the object of the joint mortgage, so the subordinated mortgagee preference is right. In this way, in order to protect the disadvantage of subordinated mortgage holders in the joint mortgage, the Civil Code recognizes the subrogation in Article 368 of the Civil Code. Therefore, it is necessary to seek the legislative measure to fill the void of the system in order to realize its purpose. It is necessary to clearly define the scope of application of Article 368 of the Civil Code, and if the purpose of the joint mortgage is not registered, it is necessary to legislate to determine whether the joint mortgage is to be regarded as a joint mortgage or not. If all or a part of the real estate as the object of a joint mortgage belongs to a person other than the debtor, a collision will occur between the subrogation of the subordinate and the subrogation of the subordinate mortgagee, so a legislative supplement on which takes the priority is needed.
In addition, the registration of the subrogation bookkeeping is an important basis for the person exercising the subrogation of the mortgage to counter a third party, but the current real estate registration law has the problem which can not register the bookkeeping due to the subrogation right at the back sentence of Article 368 of the Civil Code until all joint mortgages are auctioned. Thus it is necessary to prepare a plan that makes it easier to register the bookkeeping of the subrogation, and when the stakeholders agree to it, it should allow the registration of the change of the mortgage rights, and it also needs the supplement on the joint mortgage such as the regulation that the application of the registration of removing the joint mortgage needs the consent of the subordinated mortgagee and the regulation is differently applied in case that a part of the object of the joint mortgage is not owned by the debtor
Alternative Title
A Study on the Dividend of Joint Mortgage
Alternative Author(s)
Lieu, Hong Gyou
조선대학교 대학원
일반대학원 법학과
Awarded Date
Table Of Contents
목 차

제1장 서 론 1
제1절 연구 목적 1
제2절 연구 범위와 구성 2
Ⅰ. 연구의 범위 3
Ⅱ. 연구의 구성 3

제2장 공동저당의 의의와 성립 4
제1절 공동저당의 의의 4
Ⅰ. 의의 4
Ⅱ. 공동저당의 기능 4
1. 담보가치의 합산 5
2. 위험분산 5
3. 실행 용이화 5
제2절 공동저당의 성질 6
Ⅰ. 중첩성 6
Ⅱ. 독립성 7
1. 성립의 독립성 8
2. 담보의 독립성 9
Ⅲ. 부종성 9
1. 피담보채권에 대한 각 저당권의 부종성 9
2. 각 저당권과 피담보채권 사이에 생긴 사유의 영향 10
Ⅳ. 연대성 10
1. 각 저당권 사이의 연대성 11
2. 각 저당물의 책임분담액 12
Ⅴ. 불가분성 13
1. 불가분성과 자유롭게 선택할 권리 13
2. 저당권의 불가분성의 원칙 14
제3절 공동저당의 성립 14
Ⅰ. 공동저당의 목적물 16
1. 목적물의 범위 16
2. 공동저당물의 동종성 16
3. 목적물의 소유자 20
Ⅱ. 공동저당의 피담보채권 20
1. 피담보채권의 동일성 20
2. 담보범위의 동일성 22
Ⅲ. 공동저당의 등기 24
1. 공동저당등기와 공동담보목록 24
2. 공동저당관계의 등기가 성립요건인지 여부 25

제3장 공동저당의 배당 28
제1절 후순위 권리자자의 보호 및 기대권 28
Ⅰ. 후순위 권리자의 보호 28
Ⅱ. 후순위 권리자의 기대권(선순위 권리자와의 관계) 28
1. 선순위 공동저당자의 저당권 일부포기의 경우 29
2. 혼동의 경우 30
제2절 동시배당에서의 부담 분배 31
Ⅰ. 규정 및 공평분배의 입법취지 31
Ⅱ. 적용범위 32
1. 동시에 배당하는 경우에서의 적용 32
2. 각 부동산의 경매대가 33
3. 부동산의 책임분담액 33
Ⅲ. 구체적 사례 34
1. 선순위 공동저당권자의 경우 34
2. 후순위 공동저당권자의 경우 36
3. 2개의 공동저당이 순위가 서로 다른 경우 38
4. 공동저당과 동 순위의 채권자가 있는 경우 39
5. 공동저당의 담보범위가 다른 경우 40
제3절 이시배당에서의 후순위저당권자의 대위 42
Ⅰ. 규정 및 법정대위권 인정의 입법취지 42
Ⅱ. 적용 범위 43
1. 민법 제368조 제1항의 유추적용 43
2. 민법 제368조 제2항의 유추적용 44
Ⅲ. 후순위저당권자의 대위 45
1. 의 의 45
2. 요 건 45
3. 효 과 47
Ⅳ. 구체적인 사례 52
제4절 목적물이 물상보증인 또는 제3취득자 소유인 경우 54
Ⅰ. 문제의 제기 54
Ⅱ. 학 설 55
1. 변제자 대위 우선설 55
2. 후순위저당권자 대위 우선설 56
3. 선순위 등기 우선설 56
Ⅲ. 판 례 57
Ⅳ. 구체적 사례 58
1. 동시배당의 경우 58
2. 이시배당의 경우 59
Ⅴ. 검 토 61
1. 학 설 61
2. 후순위저당권자우선설이 옳다는 의견 62
제5절 민법 제368조의 문제점과 개선방안 62
Ⅰ. 구조적 문제 63
Ⅱ. 보완의 필요성 63
Ⅲ. 개선방안 64

제4장 공동근저당 65
제1절 공동근저당의 개념 65
Ⅰ. 근저당의 의의 및 기능 65
Ⅱ. 근저당의 성립 66
1. 피담보채권의 동일성 66
2. 담보한도의 동일성 66
3. 이색 근저당의 인정여부 67
Ⅲ. 공동저당과 공동근저당의 비교 69
1. 경매 실행시 공동저당과 공동근저당의 차이 69
2. 경매의 신청과 피담보채권의 확정 70
3. 경매대가의 배당 71
제2절 공동근저당의 경매실행상의 문제점 73
Ⅰ. 구체적인 사례 73
1. 선순위공동근저당권자가 이시배당을 청구했을 경우 후순위저당권자
대위권과의 충돌사례 73
2. 공동근저당권자의 우선배당사례 74
3. 공동근저당에서 채권최고액의 감액사례 75
4. 선순위공동저당권자의 일부저당권포기와 후순위저당권자의
대위사례 77
5. 공동저당의 목적물이 채무자와 물상보증인 소유일 경우
배당사례 78
Ⅱ. 공동근저당의 누적식 배당에 대한 문제 79
Ⅲ. 개선방안 80

제5장 결 론 81

조선대학교 대학원
유홍규. (2016). 공동저당의 배당에 관한 연구.
Appears in Collections:
General Graduate School > 3. Theses(Master)
Authorize & License
  • AuthorizeOpen
  • Embargo2017-02-21
Files in This Item:

Items in Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.