契約解除時 履行利益과 信賴利益의 관계에 관한 小考
A Study on the Relation of Expectation interest (Erfüllungsinteresse) and Reliance Interest
0
조회
0
다운로드
4
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
In this paper I have focused on the theory of the Supreme Court Decision 2002Da2539(decided on June 11, 2002) about expectation interest (Erfüllungsinteresse)and reliance interest. The Supreme court decided that plaintiff might claim expectation interest (Erfüllungsinteresse) or reliance interest alternatively. I have agreed to the theory of the Supreme Court Decision I have analysed the basis on the law of contract that belongs to damages as the object to have to compensate. Recently it has been admitted reliance interest by the Supreme Count including this case. This means that admitted cases offer a clue to insist on the theory that damages should be compensated by reliance interest against expectation. Because the doctrine of mitigation has been acclaimed as the basis of the reliance interest by the courts, legislations and theories. According to Article 77 in CISG, a party who relies on a breach of contract ought to take such measures as ore reasonable in the circumstances to mitigation of the loss, including loss of profit, resulting from the breach. If he fails to take measures, the party in breach many claim a reduction in the damages in the amount by which the loss should have been mitigated. So in actuality, it is impossible to compensate the expectation damages in full I hope that provisions regarding compensation of the disbursement of expenses shall be stipulated in Article 393 paragraph③ of the Korean Civil Code like Article 77 in CISG or Article 284 in BGB.
Abstract
In this paper I have focused on the theory of the Supreme Court Decision 2002Da2539(decided on June 11, 2002) about expectation interest (Erfüllungsinteresse)and reliance interest. The Supreme court decided that plaintiff might claim expectation interest (Erfüllungsinteresse) or reliance interest alternatively. I have agreed to the theory of the Supreme Court Decision I have analysed the basis on the law of contract that belongs to damages as the object to have to compensate. Recently it has been admitted reliance interest by the Supreme Count including this case. This means that admitted cases offer a clue to insist on the theory that damages should be compensated by reliance interest against expectation. Because the doctrine of mitigation has been acclaimed as the basis of the reliance interest by the courts, legislations and theories. According to Article 77 in CISG, a party who relies on a breach of contract ought to take such measures as ore reasonable in the circumstances to mitigation of the loss, including loss of profit, resulting from the breach. If he fails to take measures, the party in breach many claim a reduction in the damages in the amount by which the loss should have been mitigated. So in actuality, it is impossible to compensate the expectation damages in full I hope that provisions regarding compensation of the disbursement of expenses shall be stipulated in Article 393 paragraph③ of the Korean Civil Code like Article 77 in CISG or Article 284 in BGB.
참고문헌 (51)
- 곽윤직, "채권총론" (2000), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "채권각론" (2005), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "민법주해(2)" (1992), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "민법주해(9), 채권(2)" (1999), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "민법주해(13), 채권(6)" (1999), 박영사
- 고영남, "계약구속력의 근거로서 신뢰이론", 신뢰연구, 15(2) (2005)
- 고영남, "계약법에서 손해의 성질결정－ 대법원 2006.2.10. 선고 2003다15501 판결을 중심으로 －", 민사법학, (33), pp.47~76 (2006), 한국민사법학회
- 고종영, "계약해제와 손해배상", 법조, (558) (2003)
- 김규완, "손해배상과 비용배상", 재산법연구, 21(1), pp.171~194 (2004), 한국재산법학회
- 김규완, "계약해제와 결합된 손해배상-그 실천적 의미의 재고-", 민사법학, (38), pp.3~29 (2007), 한국민사법학회
- 김대정, "신뢰이익개념에 대한 재검토 소고. in: 「사법의 제문제」:경허김홍규박사회갑기념논문집Ⅱ" (1992), 삼영사
- 김동훈, "이행이익과 신뢰이익에 관한 판례의 분석", 판례월보, (358) (2000)
- 김동훈, "손해배상의 범위를 정하는데 신뢰이 익의 개념은 유용한가", Jurist, (386) (2002)
- 김동훈, "이행이익과 신뢰이익", 고시연구 (2002)
- 김동훈, "민사중요판례연구-채권자의 손해경감의무", 고시연구 (2002)
- 金載亨, "契約의 解除와 損害賠償의 範圍- 履行利益과 信賴利益을 중심으로 -", 인권과 정의, 320, pp.3~ (2003), 대한변호사협회
- 김범철, "유엔매매법상 손해경감의무", 민사법연구, 9 (2001)
- 김영두, "원시적 불능에 관한 민법 제535조의 개정에 관한 연구", 재산법연구, 27(1), pp.241~284 (2010), 한국재산법학회
- 김용직, "불법행위로 인한 손해배상의 성립 여부 및 손해의 범위", 대법원 판례해설, (25) (1996), 법원행정처
- 김준호, "계약해제의 경우, 계약의 이행을 믿고 지출한 비용의 배상", 고시계 (2009)
- 金載亨, "契約의 解除와 損害賠償의 範圍- 履行利益과 信賴利益을 중심으로 -", 인권과 정의, 320, pp.3~ (2003), 대한변호사협회
- 김재형, "계약의 해제와 손해배상의 범위,「민법론 Ⅱ」" (2004), 박영사
- 김형배, "채권총론" (1999), 박영사
- 박규용, "채권의 효과에 관한 고찰", 법학연구, 7 (2001), 한국법학회
- 송호영, "2002년 개정된 독일채권법의 주요내용", 인권과 정의, (312) (2002)
- 이상완, "계약의 해제로 인한 손해배상의 범위로서의 신뢰이익", 부산법조논집, (2) (2007), 부산지방변호사회
- 이종엽, "계약해제와 신뢰이익의 배상에 관한 판례 분석", 사법행정 (2008)
- 양창수, "독일의 새로운 민법개정", 법학, 41(4) (2001), 서울대학교
- 윤진수, "채무불이행으로 인한 특별손해, 동시이행의 항변권과 권리남용", 사법행정, 33(7) (1992)
- 정진명, "계약해제의 효과에 관한 연구 : 법정해제를 중심으로", 박사, pp.1995
- 황형모, "해제와 손해배상의 범위", 판례연구, 7 (1997), 부산판례연구회
- Altmeppen, "Untaugliche Regeln zum Vertrauensschaden und Erfüllungsinteresse im Schuldrechtsmodernisierungsentwurf", ~ (2001)
- Atiyah, "The Liberal Theory of Contract, Essays on Contract", ~ (1986)
- "Begründung zv §284, BT-Durucks 14", 6040
- Canaris, "Die Reform des Rechts der Leistungsstörungen", JZ, ~ (2001)
- Dauner-Lieb, "Das neue Schuldrecht" (2002), C. F. Müller Verlag
- Emmerich, "Das Recht der Leistungsstörungon", ~
- Farnsworth, "Contracts, 3rd ed.", ~ (1999)
- Fuller, "The Reliance Interest in Contract Damages", Yale Law Journal (1936)
- Heinrichs, "Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch" (2002), Verlag C.H. Beck
- Huber, "Schuldrechtsmodernisierung", ~ (2002)
- Lando, "Principles of European Contract Law, Parts I and Ⅱ" (2000), Kluwer Law International
- M.Bridge, "Expectation Damages and Uncertain Future Losses, in Good Faith and Fault in Contract Law", ~ (1995)
- "MünchKomm-Kramer", ~ (2001)
- Schlossmann, "Der Vertrag", ~ (1876)
- Slawson, "Why Expectation Damages for Breach of Contract Must Be the Norm": A Refutation of the Fuller and Perdue "Three Interests", ~ (2003)
- "Schmidt-Rӓntsch, Das neue Schuldrecht", ~ (1996)
- Soergel, "Kommentar zum BGB, CISG, 13 Aufl.", ~ (2000)
- Staudinger, "Kommentar zum BGB, Weiner UN-Kaufrecht (CISG)", ~ (2005)
- Stoll, "Notizen zur Neuordnung des Rechts der Leistungsstörungen", ~ (2001)
- Treitel, "Law of Contract, 9th ed." (1995), Sweet & Maxwell