영미 계약법에 있어서 불법계약의 효력과 급부물의 반환청구 = On the effect of illegal contract and the maxim ex turpi causa non oritur actio in common law

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

I wrote this article at George Washington College of American University in Washington D. C. during my sabbatical year, 2011-2012. At that time, I had concern for the maxim, ex turpi causa non oritur actio in common law. I intend to introduce the effect of illegal contracts and that maxim to ours.
English writers commonly say that a contract may be illegal in four distinct ways. In the first place, a contract may be illegal in respect of the vary act of making it. All contracts the making of which is thus
prohibited by law are for this reason and in this sense illegal contract, and are commonly void accordingly. In the second place, a contract may be illegal in respect of the performance of it. That is to say, it may consist
of or involve an undertaking to do an unlawful or immoral act, and for this reason the contract itself is commonly void. However, a contract is not illegal and void merely because its performance would amount to the
breach by one of the parties of prior and inconsistent contract made by him with some third person. In the third place, a contract may be illegal and void because made for an unlawful or immoral consideration. When
the consideration is executory, this case is identical with illegality in performance. Fourthly, a contract may be illegal and void in respect of the ulterior purpose or object of one or both of the parties in entering into
that contract. In such case if the wrongful purpose of the one party is known to the other the contract is illegal and void.

In common law, contracts are affected by illegality into a number of classes. One object of this classification is to make it possible to generalize about the effects of illegality, another object is purely expository. Various criteria have been used for the purpose of classifying the cases. The first criterion is the nature of the objectionable conduct. They classified the cases into those where the contract was contrary to positive law, those where it was contrary to morals or good manners, and those where it was contrary to public policy. The main difficulty with it is that the second category of contracts contrary to morals or good manners is hard to define and that is may overlap with the third. It can be argued that public policy is the ground for invalidating all contracts affected by illegality, so that the third category includes the other two. A
second possible criterion for classification is the formal source of the invalidation rule, which may be derived from common law or from statue. But the distinction is not decisive where the illegality consists in the
making or performance of the contract. The third, classification may proceed by the legal consequences of the contracts concerned. Thus a writer distinguished between ‘illegal contract’ and ‘nugatory contracts’, and
the same classification has been adopted by later writers who distinguished between ‘illegal contract’ and ‘void contracts’. The maxim ex turpi causa non oritur actio has no application to a nugatory contract,
but applies exclusively to those which are illegal.
A contract which is void for illegality, and therefore not binding on either of the parties, may nevertheless be in fact performed in whole or in part by one or both of them. In an illegal contract for the sale and
purchase of goods the seller may deliver the goods. Is the seller entitled to get the goods back on the ground that the contract is void? In other words, what right of restitution exists as between the parties to an illegal
contract? The general answer is that no such right exists. The rights of parties are governed by a special rule formulated in the maxim ex turpi causa non oritur actio. This maxim as to turpis causa is otherwise expressed in the saying, in pari delicto potior est conditio defendentis. An illegal contract is a turpis causa within the meaning of this principle.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서설
• Ⅱ. 역사적 의미와 대륙법계 국가의 입법태도
• Ⅲ. 영미 보통법상 불법계약의 효력
• Ⅳ. 보통법상의 반환청구배척원리
• Ⅴ. 결어
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 "수원지방법원 1987.4.15선고, 86가합1649판결"

2 "부산지방법원 1984.2.22선고, 83가합4142판결"

3 "대법원 2007.2.15.선고, 2004다50426전원합의체판결"

4 "대법원 1999.9.17선고, 98도2036판결"

5 "대법원 1997.10.24선고, 95다49530ㆍ49547판결"

6 "대법원 1993.12.10선고, 93다12947판결"

7 "대법원 1981.7.28선고, 81다145판결"

8 "대법원 1959.7.23선고, 4291민상665ㆍ666판결"

9 岡松參太郞, "註釋 民法理由(下卷)" 有斐閣書房 461-462, 1899

10 織田博子, "法律行爲無效の硏究" 日本評論社 314-, 2001

11 商事法務硏究會, "法典調査會民法議事速記錄(5), 日本近代立法資料叢書(5)" 255-, 1984

12 谷口知平, "法典調査會民法意思速記錄より見た不法原因給付" 産權等の硏究, 有斐閣 3 : 37-38, 1990

13 山田幸二, "民法講座 6 事務管理ㆍ不當利得ㆍ不法行爲(編輯代表 星野英一)," 有斐閣 101-, 1985

14 幾代 通, "民法總則, 現代法律學全集5" 靑林書院 221-, 1989

15 甲斐道太郞, "民法敎室(2), 債權" 法律文化社 317-, 1994

16 廣中俊雄, "民法典の百年(III)ㆍ個別的觀察(2)" 有斐閣 539-, 1998

17 "日最判 昭和29(1954)ㆍ8ㆍ31, 民集8ㆍ8ㆍ1557"

18 "日京都地判 平成6(1994)ㆍ12ㆍ19, 判例タイムズ 第338"

19 中舍寬樹, "戰後判例における公序良俗”, 公序良俗違反の硏究-民法における總合的檢討" 日本評論社 80-, 1995

20 明山和夫, "婚外關係における不當利得, In 不當利得ㆍ事務管理の硏究2(谷口知平敎授還曆記念)" 有斐閣 171-172, 1977

21 土田哲也, "土田哲也ㆍ谷口知平, 新版注釋民法(18), 債權 (9)" 有斐閣 709-, 1991

22 森島昭夫, "債權各論 II, 法學ガイド 民法 VI" 日本評論社 205-, 1992

23 中川 毅, "不法原因給付と信義衡平則" 有斐閣 19-21, 1968

24 田中 實, "不法原因給付" (500) : 186-, 1972

25 谷口知平, "不法原 因給與の硏究" 有斐閣 206-211, 1991

26 三島宗彦, "七○八條適用 の要件, In 不當利得ㆍ事務管理の硏究 2(谷口知平敎授還曆記念)" 有斐閣 10-11, 1977

27 Peter Bufe, "§817 Satz 2 BGB, AcP 157, 1958-1959, S.239"

28 Uwe Diederichsen, "Zur gesetzlichen Neuordnung des Schuldrechts" AcP 109-118, 1982

29 H. Stringfellow, "Who Comes into Equity must with Clean Hands" 1 : 248-, 1940

30 "Victorian Daylesford Syndicate v. Dott [1905] 2 Ch. 624, 630"

31 Detlef König, "Ungerechtfertigte Bereicherung, Gutachten und Vorschläge zur Überarbeitung des Schuldrechts, Bd.II" Bundesanzeiger 1527-1533, 1981

32 "Treitel, op. cit"

33 Jacques Ghestin, "Traité de droit civil, Les obligation, Le contrat" 929 : 1980

34 Jacques Ghestin, "Traité de droit civil" 274 : 336-, 1982

35 C. D. Baker, "Tort, 3rd ed." Sweet & Maxwell 63-, 1981

36 R. W. M. Dias, "Tort Law, 2nd ed." Clarendon 506-, 1989

37 Frederic Campbell Woodward, "The Law of Quasi Contracts" West Publishing Co 135-, 1913

38 R. M. Jackson, "The History of Quasi-Contract in English Law" Cambridge at the University Press 88-, 1936

39 Frederic Pollock, "The History of English Law, Vol.I, 2nd ed" Cambridge University Press 111-135, 1980

40 Frederic Pollock, "The Highwayman's Case" 9 : 197-, 1893

41 A. Raymond Blackburn, "The Elements of the Law of Torts, 2nd ed." Sweet & Maxwell 35-, 1949

42 Oliver Wendell Holmes, "The Common Law" LittleㆍBrown and Company 6-, 1881

43 Percy H.Winfield, "The Chief Sources of English Legal History" Harvard University Press 54-, 1925

44 R.C. Van Caenegem, "The Birth of the English Common Law" Cambridge University Press 85-86, 1974

45 Reinhard Zimmermann, "The Law of ObligationsRoman Foundations of the Civilian Tradition" Juta & Co. Ltd 863-865, 1992

46 "Scott v. Brown, Doering, Mcnab & Co. [1892] 2 Q. B. 724"

47 Robert Villers, "Rome et le droit privé, Éditions Albin Michel" 392-, 1977

48 "Richards, op. cit"

49 The American Law Institute, "Restatement of the Law of Contracts, Vol.II" American Law InstitutePublishers 985-, 1932

50 "Restatement of the Law of Contracts"

51 "Restatement of the Law of Contracts"

52 John Salmond, "Principles of the Law of Contracts" Sweet & Maxwell 149-, 1927

53 Franz Förster, "Preußisches Privatrecht, Bd.2, 7.Aufl" 496-, 1896

54 "Prentice, op. cit., §16-139"

55 "Pollock, op. cit."

56 Max Landois, "Planck's Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch, Bd.II, 2.Hälfte, Recht der Schuldverhältnisse, Besonderer Teil, 4.Aufl" Walter deGruyter 1660-, 1928

57 "Philippe le Tourneau, Juris Classeur Civil, Art.1901 à 1145, App. Art. 1131 à 1133 contrat et obligation règle , 1995, nos51 et 53, Éditions du JurisClasseur"

58 Helmut Heinrichs, "Palandt Bürgerliches Gesetzbuch, C.H.Beck’sche Kurz Kommentare, 55.Aufl." C.H.Beck 926-, 1996

59 "Motive zu dem Entwürfe eines Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuchs für das deutsche Reich, Bd.II"

60 "London and Harrogate Security Ltd. v. Pitts [1976] 3 All E. R. 809, 1 W. L. R. 1063"

61 Henri, Léon, "Leçon de droit civil, t.2, 3eéd" Éditions Montchrestien 631-, 1966

62 Karl Larenz, "Lehrbuch des Schuldrechts, Bd.II, Halbbd.2, Besonderer Teil, 13.Aufl." C.H.Beck 163-, 1994

63 Philippe le Tourneau, "La règle "Nemo auditur propriam turpitudinem allegans"" 18-, 1969

64 Georges Ripert, "La règle morale dans les obligations civiles, 4eéd" L.G.D.J. 104-, 1949

65 Taylor v. Chester, "L. R. 4 Q. B. 309"

66 Werner Lorenz, "Julius von Staudingers Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch mit Einführungsgesetz und Nebengesetzen, 12.Aufl." 1986

67 Willam Geldart, "Introduction to English Law, 10th ed" Oxford University Press 2-, 1991

68 "Honsell, a. a. O., S.96f., 109f"

69 Frederick G. Kempin, "Historical Introduction to Anglo-American Law, 2nd ed." West Publishing Co. 2-, 1973

70 Henry L. McClintock, "Handbook of the Principles of Equity, 2nd ed." West Publishing Co 60-, 1948

71 Hartmut Reeb, "Grundprobleme des Bereicherungsrecht" C.H.Beck 66-, 1975

72 "Gordon v. Metropolitan Police Chief Comr [1910] 2 K. B. 1080, 1098"

73 Marcel Planiol, "Georges Ripert, Traité pratique de droit civil français, t.7, Obligations, 2epartie par Paul Esmein, Jean Radouant et Gabriel Gabolde, 2eéd" L.G.D.J. 748-, 1954

74 Cheshire, "Fifoot and Furmston" 349-350,

75 Konrad Zweigert, "Einführung in die Rechtsvergleichung auf dem Gebiete des Privatrechts, Bd.II, Institutionen, 2.Aufl" J.C.B.Mohr 308-, 1984

76 A. E. Giffard, "Droit romain et ancien droit français, Les obligations" 164 : 101-, 1967

77 GabrielMarty, "Droit civil, t.2, 1ervol., Les obligations" 200 : 1962

78 Alex Weill, "Droit civil, Les obligations, 4eéd" Dalloz 334-, 1986

79 Jacques Flour, "Droit civil, Les obligations 1Lacte juridique, 5eéd" 368 : 1991

80 JeanCarbonnier, "Droit civil, 12eéd" Presses universitaires de France 199-, 1985

81 "Douai 24 oct. 1887, S. 1890. 2. 99"

82 Heinrich Honsell, "Die Rückabwicklung sittenwidriger oder verbotener GeschäfteEine rechtsgeschichtliche und rechtsvergleichende Untersuchung zu §817 BGB" C.H.Beck 136-, 1974

83 Philipp Heck, "Die Ausdehnung des §817 S.2 auf alle Bereicherungsansprüche" 33-, 1925

84 Fritz Schwarz, "Die Grundlage der condictio im klassischen römischen Recht, Forschungen zum römischen Recht., Abhandlung 5" Münster, Böhlau 277-, 1952

85 Henri Capitant, "De la cause des obligations, 3eéd." Dalloz 114-, 1927

86 "De Mattos v. Benjamin (1894) 63 L. J. Q. B. 248"

87 Michael H. Whincup, "Contract Law and Practice" Kluwer Law International 1-, 1996

88 Roscoe Pound, "Common Law and Legislation" 21 (21): 386-, 1908

89 "Colmar 4 janv. 1961, G. P. 61. 1. 304"

90 G. Ellenbogen, "Clerk and Lindsell on Torts, 11th ed." Sweet & Maxwell 450-, 1954

91 Fritz Schulz, "Classical Roman Law" Clarendon Press 611-, 1954

92 "Cheshire, Fifoot and Furmston, op. cit."

93 Spector v. Agenda, "Ch. 30, [1971] 3 All E. R. 417"

94 "Cass. crim. 4 juill. 1929, D. H. 1929. 429 ; Cass. civ. 2e 2 fév. 1994, Bull. civ. II. no45"

95 "Cass. com. 25 juill. 1950, J. C. P. 1950. II. 145"

96 "Cass. civ. 15 déc. 1873, D. P. 1874. 1. 222"

97 "Cass. Req. 1er avr. 1895, D. P. 1895. 1. 263"

98 Herbert D. Laube, "Cases on Quasi-Contracts, 3rd ed" The Bobbs-Merrill Co. Pub 264-266, 1933

99 "Capitant, op. cit., nos114 et suiv"

100 Franz Leonhard, "Besonderes Schuldrecht des BGB, Bd.II" Duncker & Humblot 499-, 1931

101 Bundesminister der Justiz, "Abschlußbericht der Kommission zur Überarbeitung des Schuldrechts" Bundesanzeiger 13-, 1992

102 Boissevain v. Weil, "A. C. 372"

103 Chettiar v.Chettiar, "A. C. 294, All E. R. 494"

104 John Henry Wigmore, "A Summary of Quasi-Contracts" 25 : 712-, 1981

105 Riddel, "A Legal Scandal Two Hundred Years Ago" 16 : 422-, 1930

106 Simpsonv. Nichols, "3 M. & W. 240, 244" 1838

107 Learoyd v. Bracken, "1 Q. B. 114"

108 Arnold D. Mcnair, ", Roman Law ＆ Common Law, 2nd ed" Cambridge at theUniversity Press 331-, 1952

109 W. T. Major, ", Law of Contract, 7th ed" Pitman Publishing 176-177, 1991