영미 부당이득법상의 이득토출(disgorgement of profits)책임 - 위법행위를 이유로 한 원상회복(restitution for wrongs)을 중심으로 -
Disgorgement of Profits under the Anglo - American unjust enrichment law - Focused on Restitution for Wrongs -
0
조회
0
다운로드
7
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
제3자가 타인의 물건을 권원 없이 무단으로 처분ㆍ사용ㆍ가공하여 침해부당이득이 문제된 경우, 침해자인 수익자가 침해 상대방에게 발생한 손해를 한도로 수익을 반환할 것인지, 아니면 손해의 범위와 관계없이 이득을 모두 반환할 것인지가 문제된다. 우리 통설과 판례는 손해를 한도로 하여 이득의 반환범위를 제한하고 있다. 그러나 침해자가 채권자의 재산을 침해하지 않았다면 그 노력이나 재능의 실현자체란 애당초 있을 수 없었을 것이라는 점에서, 모든 이익을 채무자가 취득하는 것 또한 수긍할 수 없다. 더욱이 침해부당이득에서는 그 이득이 손실자의 급부나 자발적인 행위를 통해 얻어진 것이 아니라 이득자가 고의나 무단으로 손실자의 권리를 침해함으로써 발생하는 경우가 많다는 점을 고려하면, 반환범위 산정에 있어 손해를 한도로 획일적으로 제한하는 것은 타당하다고 할 수도 없다. 비교법적으로 영국과 미국에서 위법행위를 이유로 한 원상회복(restitution for wrongs)을 통해 원고에게 발생한 손해와 관계없이 피고가 취득한 수익의 환수(disgorgement of profits)를 인정하고 있다는 점을 고려한다면, 반환범위와 관련하여 종래와는 다른 약간의 조정이 필요할 것이다. 손해를 한도로 반환범위를 획일적으로 제한하는 입장은 재고가 필요하다고 보며, 영미법상의 ‘위법행위에 의한 원상회복’을 고려하여 국내에서도 향후 입법론으로 이를 명문화 할 것인지에 대한 진지한 고민이 필요할 것이라고 생각된다.
Abstract
This Article reviews the restitution for wrongs in Anglo-American law and disgorgement of profits to provide helpful insights for Korean law and practice. According to the Korean Supreme Court's precedents, scope of the restitution of unjust enrichment cannot exceed the amount of damage incurred to the victims. On the other hand, the U.S. law provides opportunistic breach rule under the law of restitution which allows a party to seek the disgorgement of the other party's profits when such profits are bigger than the damages. For example, breach of fiduciary duty and opportunistic breach is justified when a party can seek the disgorgement of the other party's profits. Because it is some kind of conscious advantage-taking and can be characterized as “intentional and profitable interference with another person's legally protected interests”, which falls under the category of wrongs under the U.S. restitution law allowing disgorgement as a remedy. Furthermore, the function of contract-reinforcing provides another rationale for this rule. Opportunistic breach may occur when an intentional breach of contract would bring profit to the promisor who did not perform the contract and the available remedies for damages are an inadequate protection. Even though the main purpose of unjust enrichment is not to sanction the wrongful act but to restitute or adjust the profit which the law does not admit, in order to make unjust enrichment function as not compensation for damages but efficient restitution of profits, there is a need to have hermeneutical and legislative special actions to allows a party to seek the disgorgement of the other party's profits when such profits are bigger than the damages for the claims against the malicious beneficiary.
참고문헌 (63)
- 곽윤직, "민법주해 XVII(채권(10))" (2005), 박영사
- 곽윤직, "채권각론" (2002), 박영사
- 김상용, "채권각론" (2003), 법문사
- 김준호, "민법강의" (2012), 법문사
- 김증한, "채권각론" (2006), 박영사
- 김형배, "사무관리ㆍ부당이득" (2003), 박영사
- 백경일, "부당사무관리개념의 도입을 전제로 한 사무관리법의 새로운 체계구성 - 반의사사무관리와 불이익사무관리를 구분할 필요성에 관하여 -", 고려법학, (56), pp.181~220 (2010), 법학연구원
- 서종희, "부당사무관리 및 부진정(準)사무관리와 부당이득과의 관계 -부당이득 성립요건 및 반환범위에 관한 재고찰과 함께-", 민사법학, 63(1), pp.39~79 (2013), 한국민사법학회
- 서종희, "침해부당이득에서 수익자의 초과수익반환- 독일법을 중심으로 한 비교법적 고찰 -", 저스티스, 151, pp.173~208 (2015), 한국법학원
- 송덕수, "민법강의" (2013), 박영사
- 안춘수, "무권리자의 처분과 부당이득 및 사무관리", 법학연구, 24(1), pp.131~200 (2014), 법학연구원
- 윤철홍, "채권각론" (2001), 법원사
- 이지민, "퍼블리시티권과 부당이득 - 미국 법에서의 시사 -", 민사법학, 68, pp.525~566 (2014), 한국민사법학회
- 이혜리, "미국법상 기회주의적 계약위반에 대한 토출(吐出) 책임", 비교사법, 21(2), pp.673~704 (2014), 한국비교사법학회
- 加藤雅信, "事務管理ㆍ不當利得ㆍ不法行爲(新民法大系 V)" (2009), 有斐閣
- 能見善久, "現代信託法" (2004), 有斐閣
- 藤原正則, "不當利得法" (2002), 信山社
- 潮見佳男, "債權各論Ⅰ(契約法ㆍ事務管理ㆍ不當利得)" (2009), 新世社
- 澤井裕, "テキストブック事務管理ㆍ不当利得ㆍ不法行為" (2001), 有斐閣
- 四宮和夫, "事務管理ㆍ不當利得ㆍ不法行爲(上)" (1981), 靑林書院
- 川村泰啓, "返還されるべき利得の範囲(四)", 判例時報, (359) (1964)
- Abraham(Kenneth S.), "The Forms and Functions of Tort Law" (2007), Foundation Press
- C. von Bar, "Gemeineuropäisches Deliktsrecht, Bd. Ⅰ" (1996)
- P. Birks, "Unjust Enrichment" (2005), Oxford University Press
- P. Birks, "An Introduction to the Law of Restitution" (1985), Oxford
- A. Burrows, "The Law of Restitution" (2002)
- Candace Saari Kovacic-Fleischer, "Cohabitation and the Restatement (Third) of Restitution & Unjust Enrichment", WASH. & LEE L. REV, 68, pp.1407~ (2011)
- Dagan(Hanoch), "Unjustified Enrichment : Key Issues in Comparative Perspective" (2002), Cambridge University Press
- Edelman(James), "Book Review", L. Q. REV, 128, pp.311~ (2012)
- Ellger(Reinhard), "Bereicherung durch Eingriff, Jus Privatum 63" (2002), Mohr Siebeck
- Friedmann, "Restitution of Benefits Obtained Through the Appropriation of Property or the Commission of a Wrong", Colum. L. Rev, 80, pp.504~ (1980)
- Friedmann, "Restitution : Past, Present and Future: Essays in Honour of Gareth Jones" (1998)
- P. Gallo, "Unjust Enrichment : A Comparative Analysis", Am.J.Comp.L, 40, pp.431~ (1992)
- R. Goff, "The Law of Unjust Enrichment" (2011), Sweet & Maxwell
- J. Gordley, "Gedächtnisschrift für Alexander Lüderitz", pp.222~ (2000)
- P. Gallo, "Unjust Enrichment : A Comparative Analysis", Am.J.Comp.L, 40, pp.431~ (1992)
- Eckpfeiler Des Zivilrechts, "Staudinger", pp.2008, Martinek(Michael)
- Hagen(H.), "FS Karl Larenz zum 70" (1973)
- Harder(Sirko), "Measuring Damages in the Law of Obligations: The Search for Harmonised Principles" (2010), Hart Publishing
- Hondius(Ewoud), "Disgorgement of Profits: Gain-Based Remedies throughout the World" (2015), Springer
- D. Johnston, "Unjustified Enrichment : Key Issues in Comparative Perspective" (2002), Cambridge University Press
- Kull(Andrew), "Three Restatements of Restitution", WASH. & LEE L. REV, 68, pp.867~ (2011)
- Kull(Andrew), "Disgorgement for Breach, the “Restitution Interest,” and the Restatement of Contracts", TEX. L. REV, 79, pp.2021~ (2001)
- Larenz, "Lehrbuch des Schuldrechts, Zweiter Band: Besonderer Teil, 2. Halbband" (1994)
- Laycock(Douglas), "Restoring Restitution to the Canon", MICH. L. REV, 110, pp.929~ (2012)
- P. Maddaugh, "The Law of Restitution" (2004), Canada Law Book
- P. Maddaugh, "The Law of Restitution" (2010), Canada Law Book
- Mason(Keith), "The Restatement Third: Restitution and Unjust Enrichment" (2013), Hart Publishing
- Mcbride(Nicholas), "The Restatement Third: Restitution and Unjust Enrichment" (2013), Hart Publishing
- McCamus(John D.), "Disgorgement For Breach of Contract : A Comparative Perspective", Loyola L.A.L, 36, pp.943~ (2002)
- McCamus(John D.), "Mistake, Forged Cheques and Unjust Enrichment : Three Cheers or B.M.P. Global", Can. Bus. L.J, 48, pp.76~ (2009)
- McInnes(Mitchell), "Gain-Based Relief for Breach of Contract : Attorny General v. Blake", Can.Bus.L.J, 35, pp.72~ (2001)
- McInnes(Mitchell), "Philosophical Foundations of the Law of Unjust Enrichment" (2009), Oxford University Press
- Meier(Sonja), "Mapping the Law : Essays in Memory of Peter Birks" (2006), Oxford University Press
- J. O’Sullivan, "Unjustified Enrichment : Key Issues in Comparative Perspective" (2002), Cambridge
- Perillo(Joseph M.), "Restitution in a Contractual Context and the Restatement (Third) of Restitution & Unjust Enrichment", WASH. & LEE L. REV, 68, pp.1007~ (2011)
- "Restatement Third: Restitution and Unjust Enrichment" (2011), American Law Institute Publishers
- Sarah Worthington, "형평법" (2009), 도서출판 소화
- Sitkoff, "An Economic Theory of Fiduciary Law, Philosophical Foundations of Fiduciary Law 197" (2014), Oxford University Press
- Smith(Lionel D.), "Disgorgement of the Profits of Breach of Contract : Property, Contract and ‘Efficient Breach’", Can. Bus. L. J, 24, pp.121~ (1995)
- Smith(Lionel D. ), "“The Mystery of ‘Juristic Reason’, 12 S.C.L.R. (2d)", ~ (2000)
- Smith(Lionel D.), "Book Review", McGill L. J, 57(3) (2012)
- Watterson(Stephen), "Disgorgement of Profits: Gain-Based Remedies throughout the World" (2015), Springer