계약해석에 있어 형식주의의 정당성 및 한계

• 영문명: The justification of formalism in contract interpretation and its limit
• 발행기관: 한국민사법학회
• 저자명: 최준규(Choi Joon-kyu)
• 간행물 정보: 『민사법학』제60호, 3~57쪽, 전체 55쪽
• 주제분류: 사회과학 > 사회과학일반
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2012.10.31

영문 초록

Contract interpretation aims primarily at ascertaining the common intention of parties. But parties often have different ideas about contract terms or, even have no idea of what the terms exactly mean. Therefore, courts try to construct contracts on the basis of the meaning that a reasonable man would have attached to the contract terms. In this process, normative, policy-oriented judgement can be made. Textualism can be justified, because text is a trustworthy evidence of parties will. But textualism and formalism in contract interpretation can also be justified, because it can decrease transaction costs, help to innovate commercial practice, promote party autonomy. Sophisticated parties(ex. firms) can make detailed contracts at lower costs, and they weigh the predictability of courts decision. So, textualism and formalism may be desirable in interpretation of commercial contracts between firms, except in the case of information asymmetry or bargaining power problem. So, when interpreting commercial contracts between firms, courts are required to emphasize the meaning of written contract and refrain from implying contractual obligation, redistributing contractual risks, enforcing indefinite terms. But textualism and formalism have weakness. They should not ignore parties will. And in case of information asymmetry, party s opportunistic behavior etc., courts active role may be desirable.

목차

Ⅰ. 들어가며

Ⅱ. 문언해석의 의의

Ⅲ. 문언해석과 형식주의

Ⅳ. 문언해석 내지 형식주의가 정당화 될 수 있는 근거

Ⅴ. 계약해석에 있어 형식주의가 갖는 실천적 의미

Ⅵ. 문언과 다르게 계약해석을 한 우리 판례의 소개 및 비판

Ⅶ. 문언해석의 한계

Ⅷ. 글을 마치며

참고문헌

키워드

계약해석 문언해석 형식주의 당사자 자치 contract interpretation textualism formalism party-autonomy