불공정한 법률행위에 기한 급부의 반환청구 가부

Title
불공정한 법률행위에 기한 급부의 반환청구 가부
Other Titles
Whether it is permitted to claim a return of a benefit according to an Unfair Juristic Act.
Author(s)
정길용
Keywords
unfair juristic act; excessive profiteering; unjust enrichment; payment due to an illegal cause; partial nullity.; 불공정한 법률행위; 폭리행위; 부당이득; 불법원인급여; 일부무효.
Issue Date
201010
Publisher
영남대학교 법학연구소
Citation
영남법학, no.31, pp.127 - 160
Abstract
Majority opinion about a return claim of a benefit according to an Unfair Juristic Act is that the Unfair Juristic Act is deemed null and void and its following benefits do not have any legal cause, as it violates good customs and other social orders. This corresponds to the payment due to an illegal cause, so the return claim of benefits is not permitted, and such illegal cause only exists for the beneficiary who gained a significantly larger profit, so only the victim is permitted to claim for a return. In view of many precedents, some cases are applied a broad sense to the Unfair Juristic Act and if they can be divided into the fair partsand beyond the fair parts which correspond to the excessive profiteering by one side, only latter part is admitted as the partial nullity and the remaining part except the partial nullity is validity. At this time, the victim can claim a return of the benefit corresponding to the partial nullity. Other cases are applied Article 104 of the Civil Code to the unfair juristic act and admit that the entire act is deemed null and void. Even in these cases, both profiteers and victims are permitted to claim for a return. There exists minority who support the conclusion of precedents. In the view of several cases of legislation and precedents, the writer supports to interpret this case as follows. The essential of the Unfair Juristic Act is that one person gained significantly high benefit than the other and based on the benefit which profiteer gave; there exists two parts which are the equivalent exchange part and the excessiveprofit part by one side. The former part is not antisocial and only the latter part is antisocial, which means the former part is not correspond to the payment due to an illegal cause. Thus, it is permitted that the both profiteer and victim can claim for a return of benefits corresponding to the former part in accordance with the Civil code Article 741. The excessive profit part is applicable to the payment due to an illegal cause under the Civil code Article 746, however, the illegal cause is only by the profiteer so the victim is permitted to claim for a return of benefit corresponding to this part under the proviso of the Civil code Article 746.
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/YU.REPOSITORY/23429
ISSN
1225-6722
Appears in Collections:
법학전문대학원 > 법학전문대학원 > Articles
Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.
Export
RIS (EndNote)
XLS (Excel)
XML


qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

BROWSE