메뉴 건너뛰기
Library Notice
Institutional Access
If you certify, you can access the articles for free.
Check out your institutions.
ex)Hankuk University, Nuri Motors
Log in Register Help KOR
Subject
Humanities
General Humanities History Philosophy Religious Studies Linguistics and Literature Other Humanities
Social science
General Social Science Business Management Tourism Education Military Science Library and Information Science Law Sociology Journalism and Media Studies Psychological Science Political Science and Diplomacy Geography Public Administration Economics International Trade Anthropology Other Social Science
Natural science
General Natural Science Physics Biology Life Sciences Mathematics/Statistics Astronomy Earth Science Chemistry Other Natural Science
Engineering
General Engineering Architectural Engineering Mechanical Engineering Industrial Engineering Material/Energy Engineering Electrical and Electronic Engineering Marine and Ocean Engineering Chemical Engineering Computer Science Other Engineering
Medical science
General Medical Science Nursing Science Veterinary Pharmacy Traditional Korean Medicine Basic Medicine Clinical Medicine Other Medicine
Agriculture and Fishery
General Agriculture and Fishery Agriculture Fishery Science Food Science Forestry Animal Husbandry Marine Transportation Studies Other Agriculture and Fishery
Art and Kinesiology
General Arts Design Fine Arts Cosmetology Photography Music Fashion Kinesiology Performing Media Arts Other Arts and Kinesiology
Interdisciplinary Studies
Interdisciplinary Research Science and Technology Studies Brain and Cognitive Science Technology Policy Other Interdisciplinary Studies

KOR

Reform of Parental Authority to Prevent Child Abuse
Recommendations
Search
Questions

아동학대방지와 피해아동보호를 위한 친권법의 개정

논문 기본 정보

Type
Academic journal
Author
Kim, Sang-Yong (중앙대)
Journal
Chung-Ang Law Association CHUNG_ANG LAW REVIEW Vol.20 No.3(Wn.69) KCI Accredited Journals
Published
2018.9
Pages
83 - 129 (47page)

Usage

cover
📌
Topic
📖
Background
🔬
Method
🏆
Result
Reform of Parental Authority to Prevent Child Abuse
Ask AI
Recommendations
Search
Questions

Abstract· Keywords

Report Errors
When we are discussing the measures to prevent child abuse in our society, the issue of parental authority should be considered. In reality, about 80 percent of child abuse offenders are parents. Therefore, proper state intervention for the parental authority is needed to prevent child abuse. It can be understood in this context that the protection orders for child victims under the ACT ON SPECIAL CASES CONCERNING THE PUNISHMENT OF CHILD ABUSE CRIMES include measures concerning the parental authority, such as restriction on or suspension of the exercise of parental authority.
After the ACT ON SPECIAL CASES CONCERNING THE PUNISHMENT OF CHILD ABUSE CRIMES was enacted, the regulation of the Civil Act on the parental authority was amended. However, the revised regulation of the Civil Act for the loss of parental authority has flaws that can not be overcome by interpretation alone, and there is confusion in interpretation of the regulation due to the uncertainty of the concept.
The current Article 924 of the Civil Act stipulates the abuse of parental authority and the violation of the child interests is needed as a requirement of loss or temporary suspension of parental authority. Compared to the current regulation, the previous Article 924 described that if only there is a gross misconduct or any other serious reasons for not allowing the parent to exercise parental authority, then the Family Court may adjudicate on the loss of parental authority. However, new Article 924 eliminated the requirements of “gross misconduct” and “any other serious reasons for not allowing the parent to exercise parental authority” without a reasonable reason. As a result, the family court can not adjudicate the parents the loss of the parental authority even if the parents did gross misconduct.
The concept of “any cause making it impracticable or inappropriate for father or mother to exercise his or her parental authority” as a requirement for partial restriction of parental authority (Article 924-2 of the Civil Act) is equivocal. Discussions in the legislative process also indicate that it can not be different from the abuse of parental authority, a requirement of the loss or temporary suspension of parental authority. This is because Commissioners for the Reform Act consistently cite cases of parents refusing to treat their children, which correspond to passive abuse of the parental authority. However, given the context of the relevant regulations it could be interpreted as a different concept from the abuse of the parental authority. Even if interpreted literally, it is a different concept from the abuse of parental authority.
The concept of partial restriction of parental authority is unclear, and it causes confusion in the interpretation. If the family court adjudicate partial restriction of parental authority, the father or mother may not exercise the part of the parental authority that was restricted by the court"s adjudication. The father or mother can not exercise parental authority again until the Family Court adjudicates on the recovery of the lost parental authority according to Article 926 of the Civil Act. This means that partial restriction of parental authority of the Article 924-2 has the same legal force as the loss of parental authority. If the legislator intended the partial loss of parental authority by using the words “partial restriction of parental authority”, they should have described that expression clearly in the context.
The revised Civil Act on the loss or temporary suspension of parental authority and partial restriction of parental authority has legal defects that cannot be overcome by interpretation. There is also confusion in the interpretation due to the equivocalness of the new concepts and terms used in the revised Civil Act.
I would argue that it should be amended to solve this problem.
#친권의상실(Loss of Parental Authority) #친권의일시정지(Temporary Suspension of Parental Authority) #친권의일부제한(Partial Restriction of Parental Authority) #자녀의복리(Welfare of Child) #친권(Parental Authority) #아동학대(Child Abuse)

Contents

Ⅰ. 들어가는 말
Ⅱ. 아동학대처벌법상 피해아동보호명령
Ⅲ. 친권상실 등에 관한 개정민법 규정의 문제점과 개선방향
Ⅳ. 맺음말
참고문헌
국문초록
Abstract

References (17)

Add References
[학술지(정기간행물)] - 권재문 / 2014 / 친권의 제한·정지 제도 도입을 위한 검토사항 / 가족법연구 28 (1) : 31 ~ 60 dbpia [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김민중 / 2009 / 의료계약의 당사자로서의 「환자」와 관련한 문제에 대한 검토 / 의료법학 10 (2) : 253 ~ 286 dbpia [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김상용 / 2016 / 부모가 장기간 소재불명인 경우 미성년자녀에 대한 후견개시 여부에 대한 고찰 / 중앙법학 18 (4) : 207 ~ 232 dbpia [학술지(정기간행물)] - 김유미 / 1997 / 현행 친권상실선고제도의 문제점과 대응책 / 가족법연구 (11) google schola [단행본] - 김주수 / 2018 / 친족·상속법 / 법문사 google schola

Related precedents (1)

1 / 1

  • 서울동부지방법원 2010. 10. 21.자 2010카합2341 결정

    [1] 신생아는 자기결정권을 가지고 있으나 문제되는 진료행위를 받을 것인지 여부를 판단하고 그러한 의사를 표시할 수 있는 능력이 없다. 이러한 경우 친권자가 자녀를 대신하여 진료행위에 대한 동의를 하게 되는데, 이러한 친권자의 동의는 자기결정권이 일신전속적인 성격을 갖고 있음을 고려할 때 자녀의 자기결정권을 대리하여 행사하는 것이 아니라 자

    View more

Recommendations

It is an article recommended by DBpia according to the article similarity. Check out the related articles!

Related Authors

Frequently Viewed Together

A Child abuse death case study to enhance public responsibility for child abuse protection: Focusing on the early detection in local governments
Choi ,  HyunNim Journal of the Korean society of child welfare 2020 .03
상속의 이념과 방향 : 민법 상속편 개정, 어떻게 할 것인가?
LEE Jin Ki The Jounal of Comparative Private Law 2019 .02
Policing Domestic Violence and Child Abuse in Korea : Practical Limitations and Improvements
Kim ,  Hyeok ,  Kim The Journal of Police Science 2018 .03
The Parental Authority and Guardianship for the Foster Child
Kim ,  Sang-Yong CHUNG_ANG LAW REVIEW 2017 .12
Review on the Concept of Child Abuse Crime and Emergency Temporary Measures in 「Act on Special Cases Concerning the Punishment Etc. of Crimes of Child Abuse and Neglect」 and theirs Improvements
Kang ,  Dong-Wook Inha Law Review : The Institute of Legal Studies Inha University 2017 .09

Comments(0)

0

Write first comments.

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2018-360-003597591