경력사칭(기망행위)과 근로계약 취소의 소급효

김형배(Kim, Hyung-Bae) 한국비교노동법학회 2018 노동법논총 Vol.42 No.-

It is the tendency of precedents that the misrepresentation of career in the past was recognized as the fair reason of dismissal so that it lapsed the employment relationship in the future. At the end of 2017(Supreme Court [S. Ct.], 2013Da25194, Dec. 22, ‧2017(Original suit), 2013Da25200(Cross-bill)), however, the Supreme Court held for the first time that the misrepresentation of career is fraud so that the employment contract may be cancelled. However, there has been a different opinion between the judgment in the Trial Court or the Appellate Court and the Supreme Court on the appeal with respect to the scope of retroactive effects on the cancellation of employment contracts. The Trial Court recognized the retroactive effect (The first sentence of Article 141 of the Civil Act) without limits, the Appellate Court limited the retroactive effect only for the period providing real services, and the Supreme Court limited the retroactive effect for the period of unfair dismissal not to provide real services so that the effect of cancellation lapsed the relationship of employment contracts only for the future after the declaration of intention of cancellation(After the service of process of cross-bill). The Supreme Court held that denying the effect of providing employees’ services done under the employment contracts in the meantime is not valid so that it is not seen that the legal relationship before the cancellation formed on the basis of employees’ services lost the effect and the effect of employment contracts only for the future after the declaration of intention of cancellation is lapsed. However, it shall be seen that a person who misrepresents a career infringes the fundamental principle of private autonomy (Freedom of contract) through inducing the defective declaration of intention to the other party by fraud action. If the employment contract is entered into by unfair fraud action, the party shall not be protected under the law of the dismissal restriction in order to protect the existence of relationships of the employment contract. Therefore, the cancellation caused by fraud does not have the requirement of fair reasons under Article 23(1) of the Labor Standards Act and the compliance of consistent notification periods. Likewise, the cancellation caused by fraud does not apply to the regulation of written notice(Article 27 of the Labor Standards Act). To be limited on the retroactive effect of cancellation is only restricted on the period provided by real services and has the evidence that it has the difficulty to pay unfair profits back and the prevention of disadvantages to a worker. If these regards are considered, the effect of cancellation in this case shall affect the retroactive effect to the period of unfair dismissal without real services so that the employee shall not require the wage of this period. The case of misrepresentation of career in the past is handled with a dismissal case so that the relationship of employment contracts is lapsed for the future, but the case of same contents is dealt with a cancellation case so that the problem of retroactive effect occurs. In fact, however, the difference on the effect is a job to endure since the cancellation system is an original system that differentiates the legal characteristic and the juridical thinking unlike the dismissal system.

계약해제의 효과와 그 법적 성질에 대한 검토- 비소급채권적효과설

오시영 한국민사법학회 2012 民事法學 Vol.58 No.-

There are conflicting theories on the legal nature of contract cancellation, such as the theory of direct effect, the theory of indirect effect, the theory of liquidation relation, and eclecticism. When the civil code was being established in Germany, German legislators considered how to deal with the legal effects of introducing contract cancellation to civil law. It can be seen in the statement of reasons for the legislation that they initially favored the theory of indirect effect, changed to eclecticism during the deliberation process, and then in the final settlement process changed to the theory of direct effect. Afterwards, during the process of establishing the national assembly, it was reasoned that the effects of contract cancellation were difficult to codify and their interpretation would be left to theories and precedents. Legislators focused instead on obligations for restoration, which could be regarded as the practical effects of contract cancellation, and achieved a legislative compromise of codifying those obligations. As a result, in Japan, which inherited the German civil code, Japanese legislators also preferred the theory of direct effect but are now gradually switching to the theory of liquidation relation, a phenomenon that is occurring in Korea as well. In the personal view of this writer, however,each of the above approaches has its own set of problems. Accordingly,the writer purposes to argue a new view that an original contract which has been cancelled loses its efficacy for the future and the obligations for restoration should appropriately be viewed as a special act of claim for restitution of unjust enrichment in other words, a theory of the effect of non-retroactive bond. According to this view, it can be judged that the intent of the parties regarding contract cancellation, or the cessation of obligation to perform the parts of a contract not yet performed due to its lapse, is recognized, and the basis of the claim for restitution of unjust enrichment regarding the parts that have already been executed and the basis of liability for damages that have actually occurred are also properly recognized.

근로계약의 무효·취소와 해고의 쟁점 - 판례를 중심으로 -

신권철(申權澈) 서울대학교 노동법연구회 2019 노동법연구 Vol.0 No.47

2017년 12월 대법원은 ‘근로계약은 사법상 계약이므로 의사표시에 무효 또는 취소의 사유가 있으면 상대방은 이를 이유로 근로계약의 무효 또는 취소를 주장하여 그에 따른 법률효과의 발생을 부정하거나 소멸시킬 수 있으나 근로계약에 따라 그동안 행하여진 근로자의 노무 제공의 효과를 소급하여 부정하는 것은 타당하지 않으므로 이미 제공된 근로자의 노무를 기초로 형성된 취소 이전의 법률관계까지 효력을 잃지 않는다’고 하여 취소의 소급효는 부정하였다. 위 판결은 근로계약의 취소가 근로관계에 미치는 소급효를 제한하기는 하였으나 근로관계를 종료시키는 사용자의 일방적 의사표시인 민법상 근로계약의 취소가 사실상 노동법상 해고의 성격을 가지고 있는 점을 간과하였다. 이에 본 논문은 근로관계에서 근로계약의 무효・취소가 가진 해고로서의 의미를 노동법의 관할 영역으로 포섭하여 살펴본다. 노동법에서는 사용자의 말이 명령이자 지시이며, 근로자는 그 명령과 지시를 따를 의무가 발생한다. 근로자의 의사표시는 근로관계에서 법적 힘을 가지지 못 하고, 근로자의 노동만이 사실적 힘을 가지고서 사용자의 말에 대항한다. 사용자의 근로계약 취소가 근로관계에서 소급효를 가지지 못하는 이유는 사용자의 말(일방적 취소의 의사표시)로서 기존의 노동자의 노동을 다시 주워담을 수는 없기 때문이다. In December 2017, the Supreme Court decided that labor contract is civil contract, so if there is a reason for invalidation or cancellation in the contract, the parties concerned can claim the nullification or cancellation of the contract and extinguish the legal effect of the contract. However because it is not reasonable to deny retrospectively the effect of the labor provided by the employee in accordance with the contract, the Supreme Court decided that the cancellation of labor contract does not take effect on the legal relationship formed on the basis of the labor of the employee already provided before the cancellation. The above decision limited the retroactive effect of the cancellation of labor contract on the labor relationship. However, it overlooked the fact that the cancellation of labor contract under civil law actually has the nature of dismissal under the labor law, as a unilateral expression of employer"s intention to terminate a labor relationship. In this regard, this paper examines the legal concept of dismissal in labor relationship, and analyzes nullification and cancellation of labor contracts in the perspective of labor law jurisdiction. In labor relationship, employer"s words are order and instruction to employees, and employees are obliged to follow employer"s words. Employees" words do not have legal power but employees" works have legal protection against employer"s words. The reason why employer"s cancellation of labor contract does not have a retroactive effect in labor relationship is that it is impossible to reverse the labor completed by employee.

보험목적양도법리의 한독비교연구

최병규 ( Byeong Gyu Choi ) 건국대학교 법학연구소 2012 一鑑法學 Vol.0 No.21

The insurance contract law is very important for the welfare and happiness of citizens. Many countries make an effort to provide better insurance contract law. In fact, insurance contract law has developed significantly worldwide in recent years. In particular, in Germany and Japan, there have been noteworthy reforms in the field of insurance contract law. The existing Korean insurance contract law, which is a part of the Korean Commercial Code, entered into force in 1963. In fact, the legal provisions in this Act have some problems. For this reason, the discussion on the reform of Korean insurance contract law has been made in the Korean National Assembly. The Korean law-makers need to think it is essential to look at the relevant foreign provisions in order to solve the existing problems in Korea. Furthermore, the German insurance contract law (VVG) has influenced Korean law because the Korean jurisdiction adopted the continental legal system or the so-called Civil Law, and the Korean scholars can learn the regulatory reform from the recent development in Germany. The German reform by the enactment of the year 2007 are as such following: the reform of definition in insurance contract, the reflection of technical development, the reform of insurance police, the duty to give sufficient information to other contracting parties, the reform of the duty of disclosure, the abandonment of all or nothing principle, the duty to guarantee contract dividend regularly. Moreover, the duty of disclosure has been considered very important in Germany. Japan also adopted the duty of passive answer with regards to the duty of disclosure. Regardless of insurance contract, the insurance object can be sold out to another person. The purchaser can make a new insurance contract. But between the times it can happen that the insurance object exists without insurance protection. It should be avoided. The transfer of insurance objects is very important especially in fire insurance. Therefore the most insurance contract law has regulations about legal treatment of transfer of insurance objects. In korean commercial code there is one regulation (§ 679 KCC). In korean law, the purchaser is presumed as a insured. But presumption is not enough. The purchaser should be regarded as a insured. That is the attitude of german law. The parties should give notice about the fact of transfer of insurance objects to insurer. In the korean law there is no regulation about the effects of negligence of the notice. The insurer and the purchaser should be able to cancel the insurance contract. Furthermore the insurer should be able to reject the fulfillment of contract when the risk of the purchaser is too high. The old insured and the new insured (purchaser) should pay premium. The premium In this regard the korean law should be reformed. By the reform discussion we can refer to the rational contents of foreign (especially japanese and german) laws. The government, scholars, insurance associations and insurance companies should make hard effort to solve the problems about legislation on transfer of insurance objects.

채권양도 후 채권발생 원인계약의 해제와 원상회복의무 : 대법원 2003. 1. 24.선고 2000다22850판결

태기정(Tae, Ki Jung) 충북대학교 법학연구소 2021 法學硏究 Vol.32 No.2

According to the facts of the South Korea’s Supreme Court ruling on January 24, 2003, 2000da22850, some of the receivables for the sale of apartments were transferred first. According to the transfer of the bonds, the transferee who is obligated to pay the sale price paid the money to the transferee of the bond. However, after that, the previous sale contract between the debtor and the seller was canceled. At this time, there was a problem as to whom the seller should seek the return of the sale price paid to. In the judgment of the subject matter, it was determined that with respect to the amount of money paid to the assignee after the transfer of the claim, the assignee should return the amount paid as an obligation to restore the original state. As described above, there is a dispute over the person obligated to return when the contract that caused the claim is canceled after the transfer of the claim is made, but some views argue that the nature of the duty to return is the duty to return unreasonable profits. In this paper, I studied the disputes of these theories and the validity of the arguments, whether the person obligated to return must be recognized in the singular, and whether the effect of the cancellation is an unfair advantage. My conclusion in this paper is ①Contract cancellation has no retroactive effect, and the contract becomes invalid for the future. For unfulfilled transfer claims, the claim can be dismissed by using the claim for cancellation as an offensive or defensive method in accordance with South Korea Civil Law Article 451 (2). It creates the duty of recovery (the right to claim restoration, which is a statutory claim that is distinct from unreasonable gains, considering all costs, negligence, accessories, and damages). ② The transferee of the claim who has been transferred from the debtor after receiving the claim under the contract prior to cancellation is not a party to the contract and therefore does not bear the obligation to restore it to its original state. ③ As the satisfaction of the claim of the assignee of the claim, which has been paid from the debtor prior to cancellation, is valid in principle, there is no need to examine whether it falls under the third party in Article 548 (1), and in principle, it is not an unfair advantage. ④ However, exceptionally, if the subjective requirements to the degree of recognition of the probability of cancellation and the intention to injure other creditors are recognized, the obligation to return unreasonable profits, which is a different litigation from the obligation to restore to the original state, is borne, and the contracting party s obligation to restore to its original state and can be summarized as sluggish solidarity debtors relationship .

보험자의 정보제공의무 도입방안에 관한 연구

최병규 ( Byeong Gyu Choi ) 한국상사판례학회 2011 상사판례연구 Vol.24 No.3

In insurance contract law it is very important that the insured has to get sufficient information from insurer. Nowadays the insurance contract is very complicated. Therefore it is not easy to understand the contract concretely. Disputes are arising from the fact whether the insurer has offered sufficient information to insured. Therefore the insurance contract law should burden the insurer to offer sufficient information to insured. Nowadays many countries are making effort to get better insurance contract law. Germany has reformed the insurance contract law thoroughly in 2007. Japan has new, separate insurance contract law since 2008. The current korean insurance contract law in korean commercial code was effected in 1963. It has many problems. § 638-3 korean commercial code regulates the duty of insurer to explain the insurance contract clauses. But it is not sufficient. In that regulation there is no content about the effect of non-explanation. And § 7 german insurance contract law(VVG) are the regulations that burden the insurer to offer sufficient information to insured by the process of making contract. When the insurer violates this regulation, the insured can cancel the contract in 14 days. It has more detailed contents as korean commercial code. For instance it is not regulated in korean commercial code expressly, then the insurer offer information and which informations should be delivered to insured. The german change in regard of offering informations to insured is key point of the reform of the year 2007. We should also regard this change in germany. The reform discussion about korean insurance contract law is being done in korean national assembly. The ministry of justice has also established a reform commission in the part of insurance contract law. By the reform discussion in korea we can also consider adopting more detailed regulations about agreed value. By the work the german example(§ 7 VVG) can give us good suggestions.

한중일 및 독일 보험법 상 고지의무

최병규 한국기업법학회 2017 企業法硏究 Vol.31 No.4

A Study on duty of disclosure in insurance law of Korea, China, Japan and Germany Byeong-Gyu Choi Insurance plays very important role in modern welfare society. In insurance contract, the duty of disclosure is located in heavy position. The most disputes arising from insurance belong to dispute about duty of disclosure. Many countries in the world are making efforts to get better insurance contract law. In regard of duty of disclosure, the main countries have adopted so called passive answer system or pressing duty for a notice. In asian countries, Japan and China have regulated the passive answer system. The insurer is stronger than the insured in the aspect of knowledge and financial power. Therefore the insured should be protected even in the process of making insurance contracts. The insured does not know correctly what is important thing to notice. Therefore the insurer should ask what he want to know in regard of the concerned contract. The insured has done what he has to do in regard of duty of disclosure, when he answer correctly what the insurer asked. This is passive answer system. In Japan, the insurance contract law is separated from commercial law(2008). By this reform, Japan has adopted the passive answer system. China has also separated insurance law. But in chinese insurance law, the supervisory regulations are also regulated in insurance law simultaneously. This is not correct in the aspect of legal system concern. Any way, the chinese insurance law has also the passive answer contents. Germany has reformed the insurance contract law(VVG) in the year of 2007 severely. By this reform, Germany has also adopted the passive answer system. The insurer should furthermore let the insured know the violation effects of duty of disclosure according to german insurance contract law. We should also adopt the passive answer system in commercial law. And in the long term, we should also have separated insurance contract law. That is the global trend of world insurance contract law. Through the modern insurance contract law contents, the insurance institution should play its own role in the modern welfare and safety society. 보험제도는 국민들에게 안심을 제공하고 복지기능 등을 수행하는 중요한 역할을 담당하고 있다. 이에 세계 각국은 합리적이고 현대적인 보험법을 갖기 위하여 다각도로 노력을 기울이고 있다. 그리고 유럽연합에서는 보험법의 통일을 위한 노력을 지속적으로 경주하고 있다. 그런데 아시아의 경우 법제가 유럽연합처럼 법률들이 통일화되어 있지는 않다. 그럼에도 불구하고 한중일 3국은 서로 법률교류를 많이 하면서 각종 학술대회를 공동으로 개최하거나 한중일 법률 학회를 증가해가는 추세이다. 그리고 보험계약법은 어느 정도 세계적인 공통된 틀이 존재하기도 한다. 이러한 시점에 한중일 3국의 보험계약법제를 비교하는 것은 의미가 있다. 그리고 독일에서는 보험계약법을 2007년 선진적 내용으로 개정을 하여 같이 참조하는 것이 필요하다. 보험계약법을 관통하는 가장 중요한 이론을 꼽으라고 한다면 단연 고지의무를 들 수 있다. 이에 이글에서는 아시아 주요 3국에 해당하는 한중일 보험계약법의 내용 가운데 고지의무 부분에 대하여 비교, 검토를 시도한다. 다만 최근 보험계약법 가운데 각 국가에서 벤치마킹을 하는 독일 보험계약법도 같이 비교대상으로 삼아 고찰하는 것이 더 의미가 있다. 보험계약법제는 국제거래의 위험 보장이라는 측면에서 보면 글로벌 정합성이 중요하다. 또한 재보험에 가입할 경우에 있어서도 국제적인 틀을 충족하는 경우가 중요한 의미가 있다. 고지의무와 관련하여 일본과 중국은 수동적 답변의무화 내지는 고지촉구의무로서 파악하고 있다. 그런데 한국은 아직 이를 법에서 명시적으로 입법화하지 않고 있다. 다만 대법원이 판결에서 일종의 고지촉구의무를 인정하고 있는 상황이다. 우리의 경우에도 법률에서 명시적으로 이를 규정하는 것이 필요하다. 다만 2014년 상법 보험편이 중폭으로 개정이 되어 법무부의 법개정 추진이 언제 다시 이루어질지 현재로서는 예측하기가 어렵다. 2014년 개정 시에는 당사자 간의 이해관계가 첨예하게 대립되는 부분은 제외하였었다. 그런데 고지의무의 수동적 답변의무화는 국제적인 추세이기도 하고 글로벌 정합성에도 관련되는 문제이다. 그리하여 앞으로 추가적인 법 개정 논의를 할 때 반드시 이 안건을 다루어야 할 것이다. 그리고 법개정이 이루어진 경우에도 외국의 운용사례를 참조하여 우리의 고지의무 법리를 정치하게 운용하는 것이 요구된다.

중복보험과 고지‧통지의무위반에 대한 법적 검토 — 대법원 2001.1.5. 선고 2000다31847 판결에 대한 평석을 중심으로 —

최병규 한국경영법률학회 2013 經營法律 Vol.23 No.4

When a insured makes several insurance contracts on the same insurable interest, there are many issues that should be solved rationally. It is very difficult, to solve the problems arising from double insurance. Firstly, is the fact that a insured made several insurance contracts an important matter or not? Secondly, what is the effect, when the insured did not notice the fact that he has made several insurance contracts? The current korean insurance contract law in korean commercial code was effected in 1963. It has many problems, especially in respect of the double insurance problems. The reform discussion about korean insurance contract law is being done in korean national assembly. But by the reform discussion in korea the legislator has decided not to adopt the right of insurer to cancel the insurance contract, although the insured has violated the duty to notice about double insurance. It is in result a good decision. The japanese law and german law did not regulate such a thing. When we adopt such a regulation, the resistance of consumer community would be very hard. We should therefore the problems with double insurance registration system and the civil law § 103. When a insured abuses the insurance severely, then the insurance contracts are totally null and void because of good public order and customs. We should solve the Problems arising from double insurance rationally. Thereby the key point is that the registration of double insurance should be done exhaustively. And thereby, the personal information protection should not be neglected. This study concentrates on analysing the new korean supreme court decision about the effect of violation of duty of disclosure and duty to notice about double insurance. The author has also suggested some reform directions and detailed reform contents.

보험가입 2일후 중대질병 사망과 고지의무위반 : 대법원 2019.4.23. 선고 2018다281241 판결에 대한 평석을 중심으로

최병규(Choi, Byeong Gyu) 한국보험법학회 2020 보험법연구 Vol.14 No.1

민영보험제도는 국가의 사회보장제도를 보완하고 국민들이 어려움에 처하였을 때 안전판 역할을 담당하여 경제생활의 안정을 부여하는 기능을 수행한다. 보험제도 가운데 제일 중요하면서도 분쟁이 많이 발생하는 영역이 고지의무 부분이다. 고지의무는 보험제도가 사행성, 선의성을 특징으로 하는 점과도 결부되어 있다. 비록 자신에게 불리하거나 수치스럽다 하여도 고지를 하여야 한다. 만일 제대로 고지를 하지 않았고 그 밖의 보험계약자 보호를 위한 여러 요건을 충족하면 사고가 발생하여도 보험금을 받지 못하는 불이익을 받게 된다. 따라서 보험영역에서는 고지의무를 제대로 이행하는 것이 매우 중요하다. 보험제도는 선의성, 사행계약성을 특징으로 한다. 보험자는 정보를 보험계약자에 의존할 필요성도 존재한다. 이러한 점에서 보험계약자측에게 고지의무를 인정하되 법에서는 보험계약자 측을 보호하기 위한 여러 가지 장치들을 마련하여 놓고 있다. 고의 또는 중대한 과실로 고지의무를 위반하여야 하고 인과관계도 따진다. 고지사항은 중요한 사항이다. 중요한 사항이라 함은 보험자가 보험의 인수여부 및 보험료액의 판단에 영향을 미칠 수 있는 사실, 보험자가 그 사실을 알았으면 계약을 체결하지 않았거나 적어도 같은 조건으로 계약을 체결하지 않을 것이라고 객관적으로 생각되는 사실을 말한다. 중요한 사항 여부는 결국 판례의 축적을 통하여 해결할 수밖에 없다. 이는 당사자의 주관적 판단에 따라서 결정하여서는 아니된다. 중요한 사항 여부의 판단주체는 보험계약을 실제로 체결한 보험자가 아니며, 법원이 사건을 해결함에 있어 고려할 수 있는 전문적인 위험인수 기준에 대한 의인화된 개념으로서의 보험자이다. 이 글에서 검토의 대상으로 삼은 사안의 경우에 계약체결이 다소 이례적인 경우에 속한다. 즉 노래방 주인이 노래방 종업원을 피보험자로 보험계약을 체결하면서 자신을 보험수익자로 하였다. 그리고 보험가입 2일 후 피보험자가 폐결핵으로 사망한 경우이었다. 폐결핵 질병은 없다가 갑자기 생겨나는 질병은 아니다. 따라서 보험계약자인 노래방 주인이 종업원의 질병을 인지하고 보험가입에 나아갔을 것으로 판단이 된다. 그리고 고지의무의 주체는 보험계약자와 피보험자이다. 이러한 경우라면 고의 또는 중대한 과실로 고지의무를 위반하였기 때문에 보험자는 제척기간 내에 보험계약을 해지하고 보험금지급을 거절할 수 있다고 보아야 한다. 고지하지 아니한 질병사항과 사고 사이에 인과관계도 존재한다. 따라서 대상 판결의 판지는 타당하다 할 것이다. 앞으로 고지의무와 관련한 다양한 판례의 축적을 통하여 유형화하고 예측가능성을 부여하도록 하는 노력을 기울여야 한다. 그를 통하여 보험제도를 안정적으로 운영하는 것이 가능하게 될 것이다. The private insurance system complements the social security system of the state and plays a role of a safety board when the people are in trouble, so as to give stability to economic life. The most important and most disputed area of the insurance system is the obligation. The disclosure obligation is also linked to the fact that the insurance system is characterized by gambling and well-being. Even if it is disadvantageous or confusing to you, you should notify it. If you do not notice correctly and meet several requirements for the protection of other policyholders, you will be penalized for not receiving the insurance even if an accident occurs. Therefore, it is very important to properly fulfill the disclosure obligation in the insurance field. The insurance system is characterized by the goodness of the good and the gambling contract. There is also a need for the insurer to rely on the policyholder for information. In this respect, the insurance contractor is obliged to notify the obligation to notify, but the law has various arrangements to protect the policy contractor. Intentional or grave error shall violate the disclosure obligation and the causal relationship shall be established. The notice is important. The important thing is that the insurer may influence whether the insurance is taken or not and the amount of the insurance premium. If the insurer knows the fact, he objectively thinks that he did not conclude the contract or conclude the contract at least under the same conditions. Whether or not an important matter is finally solved through the accumulation of cases. This shall not be determined in accordance with the subjective judgment of the parties. Determining whether an important matter is an insurer is not an insurer that actually signs an insurance contract, but an insider concept as a personified concept of professional risk acceptance criteria that a court may consider in resolving an incident. In the case of the subject matter examined in this article, it is a case where the contract is somewhat unusual. In other words, the owner of the karaoke concluded an insurance contract with a karaoke employee as an insured person, and made himself an insurance beneficiary. And 2 days after the insured person died of tuberculosis. Pulmonary tuberculosis is not a disease that does not happen suddenly. Therefore, it is judged that the owner of the karaoke, an insurance contractor, has inflicted on the employee s illness and proceeded to insure. And the disclosure obligation is the policyholder and insured person. In this case, the insurer should be considered to be able to terminate the insurance contract and refuse to pay the insurance due to violation of the notice obligation due to intentional or grave error. There is also a causal relationship between illness and accident that has not been noticed. Therefore, the cardboard of the judgment will be reasonable. In the future, efforts should be made to classify and to provide predictability through accumulation of various precedents related to the disclosure obligation. Through this, it will become possible to operate the insurance system stably.

전자상거래법상 청약철회 효과의 문제점과 개선방안

김세준 한국소비자법학회 2021 소비자법연구 Vol.7 No.1

In this paper, a proposal to improve the effect of cancellation in E-Commerce Act(「Act on the Consumer Protection in Electronic Commerce, etc.」) is presented as follows. 1. When a consumer cancels the contract, the business operator must refund the price without delay, and the consumer must return the goods at their own expense within 7 days from the date of receiving the refund. However, exceptionally, if there is a separate agreement that the business operator collects the goods at their own expense and refunds the price at the same time, it shall be followed. 2. When the consumer returns the goods, the risk of return belongs to the business operator. 3. Regarding the return of digital contents after cancellation, the types are divided into regulations. First of all, a digital content provided by streaming does not need to be returned, and a non-replicable digital content stored in the user's online account does not need to be returned. However, in the case where a replicable digital content is stored in the user's online account, if the consumer duplicates it and stores it in another medium, the consumer is obligated to delete the duplicated digital content. A digital content stored in the user's personal storage medium is also obligated by the consumer to delete it. 4. The mail order contract and the credit contract should be regarded as a combined contract, and if the main contract is cancelled, the subsidiary contract should also be considered to be ineffective. 5. When the effect of the credit contract is extinguished with the cancellation, even if the consumer has paid the payment to the credit provider, he only needs to request the return of the unfair profit from him. Therefore, there is no need to consider compensation for damages delayed from mail order distributor. 6. The starting point for a business operator's price refund should be defined as the point at which the consumer's intention to cancel has reached the business operator. 7. If the business operator has not suffered any loss due to the consumer's partial use or consumption before cancellation, the claim for the return of the profits of using cannot be allowed even if the consumer has earned a profit. Therefore, it should be defined as proving that the business operator actually suffered a loss and claiming it to the consumer. 8. Regarding the return of the reduced value, the purpose of each contract must be specified separately. In particular, digital content does not degrade in value due to its nature, so even if consumers have benefited from some use, there is no need to return it. 본 논문에서는 전자상거래법상 철회권 행사효과의 개선방안을 다음과 같이 제시하였다. 1. 소비자가 계약을 철회한 경우 사업자는 지체 없이 대금을 환급하여야 하고 소비자는 대금을 환급받은 날로부터 7일 이내에 자기의 비용으로 재화를 반환하는 것을 원칙으로 한다. 다만 사업자가 재화를 자기의 비용으로 회수하기로 하고 그 회수와 동시에 대금을 환급하기로 하는 별도의 약정이 있는 경우에는 그에 따르도록 한다. 2. 소비자가 재화를 반환하는 경우 그 반송위험은 사업자가 부담하도록 한다. 3. 철회 후 디지털콘텐츠의 반환여부에 관해서는 유형을 나누어 규율한다. 즉 단순 스트리밍방식으로 제공되는 디지털콘텐츠의 경우 반환하지 않아도 되고, 사용자의 온라인 계정에 복제 불가능한 디지털콘텐츠가 저장되는 형태의 계약을 철회한 경우에도 반환할 필요가 없다. 다만 사용자의 온라인 계정에 복제 가능한 디지털콘텐츠가 저장되는 경우에 소비자가 그 디지털콘텐츠를 복제하여 다른 저장매체에 저장한 경우 그 복제한 디지털콘텐츠는 소비자가 삭제할 의무가 있다. 사용자의 개인 저장매체에 저장되는 디지털콘텐츠 역시 소비자에게 삭제의무가 있다. 4. 원칙적으로 통신판매계약과 여신계약을 결합계약관계로 보아 주된 계약이 철회되면 부수적 계약 역시 효력을 상실하도록 규정한다. 5. 철회와 함께 여신계약의 효력도 소멸하게 되면 소비자가 결제업자에게 대금을 지급한 경우에도 단지 그 결제업자에 대하여 부당이득의 반환청구를 하면 되므로 통신판매업자의 지연배상금은 문제되지 않는다. 6. 사업자의 대금환급 기산점을 소비자의 철회 의사가 사업자에게 도달한 시점으로 규정하여야 한다. 7. 철회 전 소비자의 일부 사용이나 일부 소비에 따라 사업자에게 손실이 발생하지 않은 경우에는 소비자가 이익을 얻은 경우에도 그 사용이익의 반환청구는 허용될 수 없다. 따라서 사업자가 실제로 손실을 입은 것을 증명하여 소비자에게 청구하는 것으로 규정해야 한다. 8. 가치감소분의 반환에 관해서는 각 거래목적의 유형을 구분하여 규율하여야 한다. 특히 디지털콘텐츠는 성질상 가치감소가 발생하지 않으므로 소비자가 일부 사용 등으로 이익을 얻었다고 하더라도 원칙적으로 반환할 필요가 없다.