• 목록

김원태. (2018). 가사사건의 국제재판관할―후견사건을 중심으로―. 가족법연구, 32(1), 255-308. 

https://www.kci.go.kr/kciportal/ci/sereArticleSearch/ciSereArtiView.kci?sereArticleSearchBean.artiId=ART002329235

초록: 

People usually form a relation with a nation, but there are more and more individuals forming a relation with another nation in their life. People that are missing or lacking the ability of dealing with business consistently would cross a border and move to another country. The number is gradually rising of cases in which individuals lead a life in jurisdictions with different property or family interests and connections. More and more underage children live in a different country due to the marriage or divorce of their parents regardless of their own opinions. These individuals need international protection measures.This study set out to examine the content of Hague Convention (Convention of 19 October 1996 & Convention of 13 January 2000) and overseas legislative systems with a focus on international jurisdiction in domestic cases related to guardianship for minors and propose a theory of legislation by conducting a legislative review of international jurisdiction.In guardianship cases, the decision about international jurisdiction determines the country in which the applicant should file a non-litigation trial regarding guardianship to the court and the country in which the concerned party should stand trial for the non-litigation case in the court. The determination of international jurisdiction means the determination of jurisdiction. From the perspective of the choice of procedural law according to the principle of "a procedure follows the jurisdiction law," the determination of international jurisdiction means the determination of procedural law. It means to the concerned party that the country whose court and procedural law is determined to guarantee the procedure including interrogation within the trial procedure.The criteria of determining international jurisdiction should basically be reviewed from the perspective of procedural law instead of substantial law. It should be reviewed to guarantee the fundamental right to the procedure of a minor or the person that will be a ward, who is the concerned party holding the status of the practical person in question rather than the formal one, in guardianship cases that are family non-litigation cases with no opposite party. Taking this perspective, the decision of international jurisdiction should consider which court will generate the most appropriate judgment to protect the person that will be a ward or minor.In short, it will be valid to recognize the international jurisdiction of the country of the habitual residence of the person that will be a ward or minor. If one owns property in South Korea and requires protection, it will be desirable to recognize the international jurisdiction of the South Korean court in a guardianship case regardless of whether he or she is a Korean or foreigner even if he or she has no habitual residence in the nation. Since ending trials including protection measure trials and adult guardianship trials are closely related to opening trials for adult guardianship, etc., it will be proper to recognize the jurisdiction of a state in opening trials for adult guardianship, etc.