Such expressions as “can not oppose , “can not hurt the right , or “can not hurt profits habe been used in Korean Civil Code, and these have been called ‘opposition factor , ‘protecting regulation of third-party in each article. But in the case of opposition factor, it is taken with legal position which the person who doesn t register should bear burden although it is not limited to the opposition matter for the change of a real right. So these regulations which limit the possibility of opposition for the right are not supposed to exclude opposition matter of public notification and, then the problem of how they are comprehended comes to be raised. The expression as “can not oppose being used in Korean Civil Code functions to make limit legal effects which have occurred from protection of third-party. Of this, there is no other theory because it has the meaning of protecting third-party and enough exchanging of profits between both parties for interests. But because each article in Korean Civil Code differs its nuance, it has caused the problem of whether the basis and structure of judging profit are based on the same meaning and principles. A the general theory of ‘l inopposabilité’ relatively takes nullity, rescission of legal behaviors to protect third-party s trust and divides effects into both parties and third-party s. So it limits occurrence of effect into internal thing and constructs not to affect on acquiring right of third-party in the case of shortage of external recognition. This kind of difference of approaching method suggests the meaning, factor, and effect theory to protect of third-party and a certain direction of appliable range. n this paper, the issue of ‘whether the expression as “can not oppose being used generally in civil law is possible for the theoric basis to deal with opposition matter which has been discussed and ‘what meaning it has in each article were researched.
Ⅱ. 대항불능이론의 연혁
Ⅲ. 우리 민법에 있어서 대항불능이론