계약구속력의 근거에 관한 법이론적 고찰
An Legal Theoretical Examination on the Ground for the Binding Force of Contract
0
조회
0
다운로드
3
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
A human is assumed as rational by Chales Fried's Promissory Theory based on the classical contract theory and Law and Economics grounded on the classical economics alike. However, if, in reality, humans suffer from the bounded rationality which is serous, a state interference may be necessary. Patrick Atiyah argues on this recognition that the ground for the binding force of contract is the action of detrimental reliance, etc rather than the contract party's intent. By the way, it is promise principle which supplies a ground of commitment that justifies such a reliance. In other words, the ground for such a reliance also is a contract party's intent(in this case, a promisor's intent). For this reason, Atiyah's argument seems to be unacceptable. To solve the problem of bounded rationality, contract parties frequently organize relational contracts or implicit contracts. Also, according to the recent behavioral economics, libertarian paternalism by choice architect induces contract parties to rational choices and thus improves economic efficiency. If so, relational contracts, implicit contracts, and libertarian paternalism by choice architect are helpful in some way or other to solve the problems caused by the phenomenon of bounded rationality, including the lack of intent and the precedence of state's efficiency calculation over a party's. As a result, we can keep arguing that the ground for the binding force of contract is the contract party's intent. For like Chales Fried's Promissory Theory, the Law and Economics focuses on a party's intent.
Abstract
A human is assumed as rational by Chales Fried's Promissory Theory based on the classical contract theory and Law and Economics grounded on the classical economics alike. However, if, in reality, humans suffer from the bounded rationality which is serous, a state interference may be necessary. Patrick Atiyah argues on this recognition that the ground for the binding force of contract is the action of detrimental reliance, etc rather than the contract party's intent. By the way, it is promise principle which supplies a ground of commitment that justifies such a reliance. In other words, the ground for such a reliance also is a contract party's intent(in this case, a promisor's intent). For this reason, Atiyah's argument seems to be unacceptable. To solve the problem of bounded rationality, contract parties frequently organize relational contracts or implicit contracts. Also, according to the recent behavioral economics, libertarian paternalism by choice architect induces contract parties to rational choices and thus improves economic efficiency. If so, relational contracts, implicit contracts, and libertarian paternalism by choice architect are helpful in some way or other to solve the problems caused by the phenomenon of bounded rationality, including the lack of intent and the precedence of state's efficiency calculation over a party's. As a result, we can keep arguing that the ground for the binding force of contract is the contract party's intent. For like Chales Fried's Promissory Theory, the Law and Economics focuses on a party's intent.
참고문헌 (36)
- 강경선, "법철학" (1999), 한국방송통신대학교 출판부
- 안국신, "현대 경제학원론 연습문제 해답집" (2007), 박영사
- 박세일, "법경제학" (2007), 박영사
- 법무부, "민법(재산편) 개정자료집" (2004), 법무부
- 송덕수, "민법주해Ⅱ(곽윤직 편)" (1992), 박영사
- 김재홍, "니코마코스 윤리학" (2006), 이제이북스
- 이동희, "법철학 요해" (2006), Fides
- 이준구, "경제학 원론" (2007), 법문사
- 최봉철, "현대법철학-영어권 법철학을 중심으로" (2007), 법문사
- 최종고, "법철학" (2002), 박영사
- 안법영, "민법개정안의견서" (2002), 삼지원
- 고영남, "고전적 계약법이론의 한계에 관한 연구-영미법상의 신뢰이론을 중심으로", 박사, pp.2000
- 고영남, "영미계약법에서 의사이론의 전통-프리드의 학설을 중심으로", 안암법학, 12 (2001)
- 권영준, "민사재판에 있어서 이론, 법리, 실무", 서울대학교 법학, 49(3), pp.313~354 (2008), 법학연구소
- 김기창, "청약의 구속력과 계약자유", 비교사법, 12(1) (2005)
- 윤진수, "法의 解釋과 適用에서 經濟的 效率의 考慮는 가능한가?", 서울대학교 법학, 50(1), pp.39~81 (2009), 법학연구소
- 이승우, "법률행위의 일반해석원칙과 법경제적 분석", 법률행정논총, 21(2) (2001), 전남대학교
- 이은영, "계약에 관한 법철학적 고찰 - 약속이론과 신뢰이론을 중심으로", 현대 법철학의 흐름(한국 법철학회 편) (1996), 법문사
- 조규창, "한국재산법학회의 당면과제", 재산법연구, 21(1), pp.1~23 (2004), 한국재산법학회
- 조선일보, "2009년 9월 12~13일 토-일요일 10판" (2009), 조선일보
- Brian Bix, "Jurisprudence - theory and context" (2006), Carolina Academic Press
- Charles Fried, "Contract as Promise: a theory of contractual obligation" (1981), Havard University Press
- E. Allan Farnsworth, "Contracts" (2004), Aspen Publishers
- John N. Adams, "Understanding Contract Law" (1994), Sweet & Maxwell
- Patrick S. Atiyah, "The Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract" (1979), Clarendon Press
- Richard A. Posner, "Economic Analysis of Law, Little" (1973), Brown & Co
- Richard A. Posner, "Economic Analysis of Law, Little" (1992), Little, Brown & Co
- Richard H. Thaler, "Nudge" (2009), Penguin Books
- Anne de Moor, "Intention in the Law of Contract: Elusive or Illusory", Law Quarterly Review, 106, pp.106~ (1990)
- Charles Fried, "Book Review of the Rise and Fall of Freedom of Contract by P. S. Atiyah", Harvard Law Review, 93 (1980)
- James Gordley, "Equality in Exchange", California Law Review, 69 (1981)
- Patrick S. Atiyah, "Fuller and the Theory of Contract, Essays on Contract" (1986), Clarendon Press
- Patrick S. Atiyah, "Contracts, Promises, and the Law of Obligations, Essays on Contract" (1986), Clarendon Press
- Patrick S. Atiyah, "Form and Substance in Contract Law, Essays on Contract" (1986), Clarendon Press
- Randy E. Barnett, "A Consent Theory of Contract", Columbia Law Review, 86 (1986)
- "Question#61, #77 Article/("[URL]