징벌적 손해배상을 명한 외국판결의 승인과 집행에 관한 소고 - 우리나라에서 징벌적 손해배상 제도를 도입한 이후의 논의를 중심으로 -

Abstract

The exercise of jurisdiction by the State is an exercise of its sovereignty and cannot be claimed by any other country, citing a foreign judgment as a result of the exercise of jurisdiction by another country. However, if only these principles are to be carried out, the parties to the dispute eventually come to the conclusion that the debtor's execution property should be sentenced again in accordance with the country's trial procedures, which could be a question of whether the country has the right to be an international judge, and is excessively inefficient in terms of the litigation economy. In particular, it is in some respects inconsistent with the intention of both parties to obtain their first foreign judgment, simply because a foreign decision sentenced between the parties of an international dispute and with no other objection to the proceedings is a judgment that was not handed down in a country with executive property. Based on the recognition and necessity of these matters, many countries separately stipulate the approval and execution system for foreign judgments, allowing the approval and execution of foreign judgments. As for the punitive damages system to be discussed in this article, unlike the continental legal system, which is based on the principle of transference compensation for damages actually suffered by creditors, Anglo-American law countries are introducing punitive damages that require compensation beyond the scope of the damages he actually suffered if the creditor meets certain requirements. In continental legal circles, damages only have the same meaning as to make up for damages suffered by the accused, so the plaintiffs cannot claim such things as punitive damages for civil purposes. n recent years, as Korea has introduced punitive damages through individual legislation, the above discussion has not exactly met the current situation. Therefore, even considering the current situation, there is a real benefit to discuss whether it can unconditionally determine that a foreign judgment that ordered punitive damages is against the Korean air force.