상속회복청구권의 행사기간에 대한 연구

Abstract

There are only Art. 999 clause 1 and 2 for provisions in the Civil Law on the right of claim for inheritance recovery, but considerable amounts of researches and relevant precedents have been presented on the right for the one article. Although this study may be another one to mention the subject, there are not much research on true purpose that the system intented to protect.BR The author of this study investigated the history, institutional aims, and process of legislation of the system, and reviewed the attitude of domestic theories and precedents of interpreting exercising period of the right of claim for inheritance recovery as statute of limitations, for identifying the true purpose of the right.BR In every instance, problems occurring on the right of claim for inheritance recovery begin to decide whether protection of the right for inheritance of real inheritor or rapid safety of transaction relation on inheritance would be emphasized. This is the important starting point in interpreting the legal nature, exercising period, and range of pretended inheritor in the right of claim for inheritance recovery. Given the purpose presented in history of the first legislation on the right of claim for inheritance recovery, the system of claim for inheritance recovery should be developed centering on protection of real inheritor.BR Recently the Constitutional Court decided that the concrete exercising period of the right of claim for inheritance recovery should be at the discretion of legislator (the Constitutional Court, September 24, 2009, 2008 Constitutional-Ba 2 Decision; the Constitutional Court, July 31, 2008, 2006 Constitutional-Ba110 Decision). Therefore, revision of Art. 999 clause 2 would be the only method to protect real inheritor by expanding the exercising period of the right of claim for inheritance recovery. In order to resolve conflicts on inheritance by the system of claim for inheritance recovery, protection of real rightful person should be prior.