부동산경매에 있어서 유치권제도의 개선방안에 관한 연구

부동산 경매절차의 유치권제도 문제와 개선방안을 연구했다.

Real estate auction has become a required subject for contemporary investment techniques. The lawcourt auction has two kinds of structure : one is Compulsory Auction in which a winner of a civil suit requires a forced sale by schuldtitle and another is Voluntary Auction which is to be completed when the parties interested finally receives allotment through the execution of mortgages. In the real estate auction which is proceeded basically through the compulsory auction or voluntary auction by Civil Execution Act, what annoys the bidder or purchaser is the Lien system.

Lien system in the lawcourt auction has many loopholes which are frequently exploited by debtors and interested parties through conspired fake or inflated lien argument. Such false arguments is nothing but mocking the Judiciary organ and frequent cases of them will make a harmful tendency to take light of the law in our society. Efforts to revise the Lien system have been continued for many years, and, as of 2013, are reflected in the partial amendment draft of Civil Law of Ministry of Justice. The Lien amendment proposal included in the draft is known to be very innovative and expected to make a substantial change.

Still, there remains many problems to be solved until the new proposal is put into practice. After the new Civil Execution Act was enforced, the real estate auction market got new vigor, because it got rid of many problems in the past so that bidders can use more transparent and fair bidding system. However the Lien system in the Civil Law was not changed and is upholding real estate lien as a preceeding right like the statutory real estate security right, making many problems by precedents that admits anyone insist lien used as a all-powerful sword.

Yet in practice, a lien that was not found out in the process of on-site inspection before the auction by bailiff annoy supposed bidders and successful bidders, popping out unexpectedly after the auction. Under the present Civil Execution Act, lien regulations which charge the buyer the eviction task, make room for debtors in collusion with a 3rd party, i.e. construction businessman, to apply false or inflated lien, or try to bid successfully at a lower price in the name of a 3rd person, disturbing the auction market. Moreover, the Lien is a right valid without any registration, a public announce system, valid if only it is announced publicly with seizing.

Accordingly it is not applied with the general principle of compulsory registration in the transfer of a real right, and, strange to say, is protected more strongly than any registrated real right, due to the regulations of Civil Execution Act which makes it impossible for a buyer to take over the bidded object without paying the amount of money the lienholder claims.

Despite the present legal system which definitely defines the principle of real estate registration, it is awkward to see the monster, lien, due to the principle of buyer’s task of eviction, substantially endanger buyer’s position and make the expected bidders reluctant to bid, seriously lowering the bidding price even of an excellent article. Frequently, lien also infringe prior order creditors’ rights, or make it impossible for the buyer to take over the article by a simple procedure of Order-to-deliver. Examining the Lien system in the real estate auction procedure, one can find several problems.

One is that there is no obligation for the lienholder to declare the lien for it`s establishment. The second is, if it is declared there is no way for the expected bidder to verify it, because only interested party is allowed to read the lien declaration due to the inflexible thinking of the court officials. These can be legal deficiencies. The third one is, there must be a compulsory inspection record about the lien related facts in the on-the-spot inspection bailiff’s and/or appraisal institution’s inspection report. Lien is only to be declared, and there is no inspection report of the declaration in any of the local courts.

This is not only the legal deficiencies but is a problem of attitude which lowers the quality of Korean legal service This treatise examines the Lien system of current real estate court auction, and attempting to find out how to solve the problems arising in the practical auction, reviews the concepts and definitions of the Civil Execution Act, definitions and procedures of the compulsory execution and other auction procedures in the Civil Execution Act. It also tries to understand the theory of Lien system, its nature, effect and requirements for establishment of lien, and thereafter, examine foreign lien systems, compare them with ours.

On the basis of the above study, this treatise tries to find out problems in the Lien system and improvement method thereof so that we can find methods to prevent overuse of lien and harms thereof, find out how to protect genuine lienholders by reasonable allotment according to their priority. Lastly it examines the partial amendment draft of Civil Law of Ministry of Justice which is being announced as the 2013-6 notice of the Ministry of Justice and point out some problems and suggest solutions thereof. 현대사회의 재태크 수단으로 부동산경매는 필수과목이 되었다. 법원경매는 민사소송에서 승소한 자가 집행권원에 의한 강제경매를 실시하거나 또는 저당권의 실행을 통한 임의경매를 통해 최종적으로 이해관계인이 배당을 받음으로써 종료되는 구조를 가지고 있다.

이러한 부동산경매는 기본적으로 민사집행법에 따른 강제경매 또는 임의경매의 형식으로 진행되는데 이때에 경매입찰자 및 매수인들을 괴롭히는 부분이 바로 유치권제도이다. 경매절차에 있어서 유치권제도는 허점이 많아서 이를 악용하려는 채무자 또는 이해관계인이 허위로 공모하여 허위유치권 또는 과장된 유치권을 주장하는 사례가 빈번하게 이루어지고 있다. 이는 법의 허점을 악용하여 사법기관을 우롱하는 것이며 또한 이러한 사례가 빈번할수록 우리사회에 법을 경시하는 풍조를 조장하는 요소로 작용하고 있다. 유치권제도는 이미 몇 년 전부터 개정을 추진해 왔으며 2013년 현재 법무부에서 새로운 민법 일부법률 개정시안이 나와서 활발한 입법이 추진되고 있다. 새로운 민법의 유치권제도는 획기적인 개정안이 되어서 많은 변화가 예상되고 있다. 하지만 새로운 개정안이 시행되기까지는 아직 풀어야 할 과제들이 많이 있다. 민사집행법이 2002년 7월 1일 새로 시행됨에 따라 부동산경매시장은 새로운 활력을 띠게 되었다. 과거의 여러 가지 많은 문제점들이 확실히 제거되어 경매입찰자들이 좀 더 투명하고 공정한 입찰이 가능하게 되어 왔다. 하지만 유치권제도는 기존 민법내용을 그대로 유지하게 되면서 부동산유치권에 법정담보물권과 아울러 우월적 효력을 인정하고 있기 때문에 누구에게나 유치권을 주장할 수 있다는 판례의 입장으로 인하여