임대인의 전차인에 대한 차임 직접청구권과 전차인의 차임지급의 항변 = 대법원 2008.3.27. 선고 2006다45459 판결

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Article 630, 1st clause of Korean Civil Code prescribes: “If a lessee has sub-leased the object with the consent of the lessor, the sub-lessee assumes the obligations directly to the lessor. It this case the sub-lessee may not set a defense against the lessor by a payment of the rent to the sub-lessor.” Differently from the Article 613 of Japanese Civil Code, the Article 630 of Korean Civil Code does not regulate the advance payment of the rent to the sub-lessor, and this type is different from the Article 1753 of French Code Civil which regulates the advance payment of the rent in the time of seize. Nevertheless according to the majority of the civilist and the cited judgement, the sub-lessee may not set a defense against the lessor by a payment of the rent in advance to the time of payment to the sub-lessor. But the interpretation like this is contrary to the meaning of the words of this Article, and the difference between the Article 630 of Korean Civil Code and the Article 630 of Japanese Civil Code is passed over. So just like a french doctrine of the direct action, the Article 630 of Korean Civil Code should be interpreted as the sub-lessee may not set a defense by a payment of the rent to the time of payment to the sub-lessor against the lessor after his exercise of the direct action.
The cited judgement in which the sub-lessee could compensate the overdue rent to the caution is not reasonable, and can be justified only in case that each obligation has the requisite for the set-off before the exercise of the direct action of lessor.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 다른 나라와 우리나라의 직접청구권
• Ⅲ, 임대인의 전차인에 대한 차임직접청구권과 전차인의 차임지급의 항변
• Ⅳ. 대상판결의 검토
• Ⅴ. 결론
• 참고문헌
• Abstract

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 박수곤, "프랑스에서의 下都給法에 대한 槪觀- 건축하수급인의 공사대금채권 담보수단을 중심으로" 한국민사법학회 (25) : 371-404, 2004

2 南孝淳, "프랑스法上 轉買受人(消費者)의 直接訴權" 서울대학교 37 (37): 1996

3 오수원, "중첩적 채무인수의 법적 성질과 인수인의 상계- 대법원 1997. 4. 22. 선고 96다56443 판결 -" 법조협회 56 (56): 246-289, 2007

4 오수원, "자동차손해배상보장법에서 압류·양도가 금지되는 피해자의 직접청구권의 범위 -대법원 2006. 4. 20.자 2005마1141 결정-" 법조협회 58 (58): 279-317, 2009

5 사법연수원, "손해배상"

6 金基善, "韓國債權法各論" 法文社 1988

7 星野英一, "賃借權と讓渡ㆍ轉貸借, 民法講座, 5, 契約" 有斐閣 1985

8 金鍾華, "註釋民法, 債權各則, (3)" 韓國司法行政學會 1999

9 郭潤直, "物權法" 博英社 1987

10 幾代 通, "注釋民法, (15), 債權, (6)" 有斐閣 1981

11 梅謙次郞, "民法要義, 卷之三, 1911復刻板" 有斐閣 1985

12 閔日榮, "民法注解[XV], 債權, (8)" 博英社 1997

13 民議院法制司法委員會民法案審議小委員會, "民法案審議錄, 上卷" 1957

14 李宙興, "實務損害賠償責任法 : 附 損害保險 및 自動車保險" 博英社 1997

15 鄭泰綸, "共同不法行爲者의 責任과 求償務硏究, 比較法實務硏究, Ⅲ" 博英社 1999

16 我妻榮, "債權各論, 中, 卷一" 岩波書店 1985

17 金曾漢, "債權各論" 博英社 1989

18 李銀榮, "債權各論" 博英社 2005

19 이동진, "下都給法上 直接請求權에 관한 硏究" 법조협회 58 (58): 74-130, 2009

20 金賢錫, "下受給人의 工事代金 直接請求權과 債權假押留" 民事判例硏究 2005

21 A. Duranton, "Traité des contrats et des obligations en général, suivant le code civhl, t. II" Imperimerie de P. Gueffier 1819

22 G. Boissonade, "Projet de Code civil pour L’Empire du Japon" Tokio 1 : 1882

23 W. Möschel, "Münchener Kommentar zum Bürgerlichen Gesetzbuch, 2 Auf. München, C.H. Beck"

24 Ch. JAMIN, "La notion d’action directe, préface de J. GHESTIN" L.G.D.J. 1991

25 Ch. Jamin, "Juris-Classeur, Fasc. Art. 1166-1"

26 B. Vial-Pédroletti, "Juris-Classeur, Art. 1708 à 1762, Fasc. 236, Edition du Juris-Classeur"

27 M.L. IZORCHE, "Encyclopédie Dalloz, Réoertoire de droit civil, Action directe"

28 김천수, "2008년 민사(채권법) 판례 연구" 대한변호사협회 (391) : 55-76, 2009