구체적 액수 산정이 불가능한 손해액 산정방법에 대한 판례 입장과 민사소송법 제202조의2의 활용방안 - 대법원 2004.06.24. 선고 2002다6951, 6968 판결을 중심으로 - = The Decision on the method of calculating the amount of compensation for which a specific amount cannot be calculated and the application of Article 202-2 of the Korean Civil Procedure Act - Korea Supreme Court Decision 2002Da6951, 6968 sentenced 24 June

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Although the article 202-2 of the Civil Procedure Act was established in 2016 to allow a judge to determine the amount of damage in cases where it is recognized that damage has occurred but it is very difficult to prove the specific amount of damage due to the nature of the case, ‘Korea Supreme Court Decision 2002Da6951 and 6968 sentenced 24 June 2004’(“the Decision”) still has many meanings in terms of Principle of Disposition, Principle of Pleading and Principle of Free Evaluation of Evidence.
First of all, although the original judgment of the lower court recognized the compensation for non-economic damages despite the plaintiff's claim for compensation for damages from non-performance of contract obligations, the Supreme Court construed that this lower court’s original judgment recognized, in fact, the compensation for damages from non-performance of contract obligation, not compensation for non- economic damages. However, in the sense that the subject-matter asserted by the parties in lawsuit and the subject-matter recognized by the lower court’s original judgment may be interpreted differently, this Supreme Court’s judgment has a possibility of controversy related to the Principle of Disposition, particularly, regarding the position traditionally has been maintained by the court that the compensation for non-economic damages is an independent subject-matter from the compensation for economic damages among the of subject-matter of lawsuit in the litigation for compensation for damages.
In addition, when it comes to that, in this Supreme Court’s judgment, the court determined the amount of damage even though the parties have failed to clearly assert or prove the amount of damage, I believe there is also a possibility of controversy regarding the Principle of Pleading in which the parties have duties clearly assert or prove the amount of damage.
Furthermore, the court calculated the amount of damage based on Principle of Free Evaluation of Evidence which is not a proper tool to c calculate the amount of damage.
In this paper, by examining the detailed issues of the Decision regarding the Principle of Disposition, Principle of Pleading and Principle of Free Evaluation of Evidence, I tried to suggest that we may need to interpret that, the article 202-2 of the Civil Procedure Act is not merely to alleviate the degree of the judge’s heart condition, but to give the judge a specific discretion in calculating the amount of damage in case it is impossible to calculate the specific amount of compensation for damage.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김재형, "프로스포츠 선수계약의 불이행으로 인한 손해배상책임" 대한변호사협회 (345) : 85-101, 2005

2 김상국, "채무불이행으로 인한 재산상 손해의 증명이 곤란한 경우 그 손해액 판단방법" 17 : 2006

3 김경욱, "증명의 곤란과 상당한 손해배상액의 인정" 한국민사소송법학회 20 (20): 67-103, 2016

4 전효숙, "저작권침해소송의 소송물 -대법원 2013.7.12.선고2013다22775판결을 중심으로-" 법학연구소 19 (19): 529-556, 2014

5 서광민, "위자료에 관한 몇가지 문제점" 2 : 2000

6 정영환, "신민사소송법" 법문사 2019

7 이시윤, "신민사소송법" 박영사 2013

8 정영환, "신모델과 소송물 이론" (43) : 2005

9 황호성, "손해액 증명 특칙의 의의와 전망- 2016 법률구조 세미나 제1세션 발표" 불법행위 연구 동호회 2016

10 이현종, "불법행위 손해배상청구소송의 소송물에 관한 검토" 한국민사소송법학회 23 (23): 1-37, 2019

11 양경승, "변론주의와 직권주의의 구별기준 및 상고심의 심리대상" 62 : 2017

12 정동윤, "민사소송법" 법문사 2021

13 강현중, "민사소송(Ⅲ)" 한국민사소송법학회지 2000

14 대법원 법원행정처, "민사소송 실무교재" 법원행정처 2015

15 최우진, "구체적 액수로 증명 곤란한 재산적 손해의 조사 및 확정 : 사실심 법원 권능의 내용과 한계" 51 : 2011

16 김태진, "M&A 계약 위반과 손해 - 손해액 산정과 민사소송법 제202조의 2의 활용 여부 -" 법학연구소 42 (42): 41-104, 2018