民法上 善良한 風俗에 反하는 行爲의 分類論 = The classification of the Juristic Act Contrary to good morals in korean civil law

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Korean civil article 103, regulates that 'A juristic act, which has for its object such matters, are contrary to good morals and other social order shall be null and void.' This essay depicts about the legal theory on good morals by analyze the cases. The Korean civil article 103 is somewhat similar to German civil article 138. As I mentioned at the beginning, the Korean civil article 103 states the framework for good morals and violation of social order, which is different from the Article 104 which regulates the unfair juristic act: however, regardless of the formalistic approach that resembles German civil article, the essential material still follows the Japanese old civil article. In other words, Korean civil articles should have regulated differently by ignoring the unfair juristic act, so that the similarity to German civil article is overlooked and the proximity to Japanese civil article is over-emphasized. The meaning of 'good morals' refers to the minimum ethic code that all the citizens must follow, and the meaning of 'Social order" refers to the public order or general benefits: however, the proper terms of good morals embraces the both concepts.


The theory of the breaches of good morals should be separated based on the judical decision of the supreme court. As the result of analysis of the all the cases from 1960s, the good morals can be divided into 7 categories, such as act contrary to the ethics of gender, act contrary to the family, act contrary to the social ethics, act contrary to the life ethics, act contrary to the economic ethics, act contrary to the ethics of occupation, and act contrary to the communal ethics.


In conclusion, the main essence of Korean civil article 103 should be the concepts of good morals. For the legislator's perspective point of view, the social order should be rescinded and Article 103 also regulated only the violation of good morals' area.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 민법 제103조의 적용기준 및 범위
• Ⅲ. 성량한 풍속에 반하는 행위의 종례 분류론
• Ⅳ. 판례기준에 의한 실질적 분류
• Ⅴ. 결론
• 참고문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 박준서, "주석민법 총칙⑵" 한국사법행정학회 2001

2 최행식, "외국판결의 효력요건으로서의 공서양속" 원광대학교 2002

3 변진장, "신분행위의 무효와 취소" 25 : 1994

4 송덕수, "신민법강의" 박영사 2008

5 서호정, "선량한 풍속에 관한 연구-민법 제103조를 중심으로-" 영남대학교 2006

6 김윤찬, "반사회질서의 법률행위에 관한 연구" (20) : 2001

7 김학동, "반사회적 법률행위에 관한 판례분석" 6 : 2001

8 명순구, "민법총칙(민법학 원론Ⅰ)" 법문사 2007

9 김주수, "민법총칙(민법강의Ⅰ)" 삼영사 2005

10 곽윤직, "민법총칙(민법강의Ⅰ)" 박영사 2006

11 윤형열, "민법총칙" 법영사 2009

12 이은영, "민법총칙" 박영사 2005

13 이영준, "민법총칙" 박영사 2007

14 이태재, "민법총칙" 법문사 1981

15 백태승, "민법총칙" 법문사 2008

16 김증한, "민법총칙" 박영사 2001

17 김준호, "민법총칙" 법문사 2006

18 김상용, "민법총칙" 법문사 2003

19 고상용, "민법총칙" 법문사 2004

20 정기웅, "민법총칙" 법문사 2009

21 홍성재, "민법총칙" 대영문화사 2007

22 곽윤직, "민법주해 제2권 총칙⑵" 박영사 2002

23 한삼인, "민법 제103조의 판례분석" 제주대학교 (7) : 2001

24 현승종, "로마법" 법문사 2004

25 엄영진, "공서양속 기타 사회질서" 국가고시학회 1968

26 ホセ․ヨンバルト, "法と道德" 成文堂 1981

27 我妻 榮, "民法講義 Ⅰ 民法總則" 有斐閣 1933

28 平野裕之, "民法總則" 日本評論社 2003

29 我妻 榮, "民法案內" 一粒社 1991

30 山本敬三, "公序良俗論の再構成" 有斐閣 2000

31 渡部 晃, "公序良俗入門" 社團法人 商事法務硏究會 2000

32 椿久美子, "公序良俗に關する我妻類型" 日本評論社 64 (64): 1992

33 "Termes juridiques, 10eéd." Dalloz 1995

34 Flume, "Allgemeiner Teil des Bürgerlichen Rechts"

35 Medicus, "Allgemeiner Teil des BGB. 7. Aufl."