@article{ART001272497},
author={조무제},
title={A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China},
journal={DONG-A LAW REVIEW},
issn={1225-3405},
year={2008},
number={42},
pages={273-353}
TY - JOUR
AU - 조무제
TI - A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China
JO - DONG-A LAW REVIEW
PY - 2008
VL - null
IS - 42
PB - The Institute for Legal Studies Dong-A University
SP - 273
EP - 353
SN - 1225-3405
AB - 本稿是对韩国民事诉讼法制度规定和与其相对应的中国民事诉讼法规定进行了比较研究。在两国民事诉讼法中，本文的范围只限定为普通诉讼程序和不服程序即第一审 上诉审程序和再审程序。
通过以上两国民事诉讼法制度的比较研究,能看出民事诉讼法的立法论与解释论所参考之重要性与其原因。
第一、是否彻底执行当事者主义或者当事者协同主义。韩国民事诉讼法对此原则性比较彻底，相比之下，中国的民事诉讼法虽然在书面上规定当事人的辨論权和处分权，但是在审理判决程序的具体阶段有不少法院的职权参与，出现要求当事人的行为得到法院准许的情况。例如有代表的是，以法院职权证据调查、职权财产保全、撤诉的准许等。
第二、法官审判的独立性问题。对于疑难的案件的审判委员会的判断干预, 具体案件的法院院长的监督，有关提起抗诉的检察裁判监督等，容易产生关于中国裁判机关审判权的独立性的疑问。
第三、必要程序规定的具备是否。中国民事诉讼法缺少各种诉讼类型要件，证据类型调查程序、判决的种类和效力等详细规定在每个程序阶段不具备详细规定，便于法官执行职权，进而会妨碍当事人权利程序上的保障，而且因准据法规的缺少，确保不了合法圆滑的辩论。其结果造成审理法官在调解案件上的偏向，从而产生纠纷不能及时得到解决的忧虑。
第四、在法令解释适用统一的问题。对与韩国民事诉讼法的程序各个阶段上，各种规定的解释和补充缺少的规定，大法院的判例能起到很大的作用。相反地,中国民事诉讼法上的4级2审制和续审制，很难达成统一的法律解释见解。中国很多司法解释规定是用于补完上述问题，必要时制定其规定或者改废也有一定的限界。
以上这些问题的起因，是民事诉讼的4大理想在所有制度上还没有得到完全体现和实践。为了在上述问题上达到和谐的地步，在完善的规定程序范围内，在法院依法指导下，应该使包括当事人和事件相关者互相紧密协同的公开法庭辩論能够圆滑地进行。
KW -
DO -
UR -
ER -
조무제. (2008). A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China. DONG-A LAW REVIEW, 42, 273-353.
조무제. 2008, "A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China", DONG-A LAW REVIEW, no.42, pp.273-353.
조무제 "A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China" DONG-A LAW REVIEW 42 pp.273-353 (2008) : 273.
조무제. A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China. 2008; 42 : 273-353.
조무제. "A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China" DONG-A LAW REVIEW no.42(2008) : 273-353.
조무제. A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China. DONG-A LAW REVIEW, 42, 273-353.
조무제. A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China. DONG-A LAW REVIEW. 2008; 42 273-353.
조무제. A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China. 2008; 42 : 273-353.
조무제. "A Study on Comparative Analysis of Differences between Korean Civil Procedure Law and that of China" DONG-A LAW REVIEW no.42(2008) : 273-353.
