2007년도 주요 民法 관련 판례 회고 (A Review of Civil Law Cases decided in 2007)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 서울대학교 법학연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 서울대학교 법학 / 49권 / 1호 / 315 ~ 405페이지
· 저자명 : 윤진수

초록

This paper reviews 24 important cases decided in 2007. Among these cases, the following cases are more important.
1.The Supreme Court decision on 29. 3. 2007 acknowledged for the first time that a contract can be terminated because of the hardship.
2.On 15. 2. 2007, the Supreme Court declared en banc that a loan contract with the extraordinary high rate of interest can be void because of the social policy.
3.The Supreme Court decision of 21. 6. 2007 overruled its own decision in 2001 and declared that a tenant of an unregistered house can exercise preferential right against the money obtained by the public sale for the land on which the house stands.
4.According to the Supreme Court decision of 29. 11. 2007, one who transferred money to another’s bank account by mistake should seek the restitution from the receiver, not from the receiver’s bank.
5.The Constitutional Court declared on 30. 8. 2007 that the law which limited the responsibility of one who caused a accidental fire in case of gross negligence was incompatible with the constitution.

영어초록

This paper reviews 24 important cases decided in 2007. Among these cases, the following cases are more important.
1.The Supreme Court decision on 29. 3. 2007 acknowledged for the first time that a contract can be terminated because of the hardship.
2.On 15. 2. 2007, the Supreme Court declared en banc that a loan contract with the extraordinary high rate of interest can be void because of the social policy.
3.The Supreme Court decision of 21. 6. 2007 overruled its own decision in 2001 and declared that a tenant of an unregistered house can exercise preferential right against the money obtained by the public sale for the land on which the house stands.
4.According to the Supreme Court decision of 29. 11. 2007, one who transferred money to another’s bank account by mistake should seek the restitution from the receiver, not from the receiver’s bank.
5.The Constitutional Court declared on 30. 8. 2007 that the law which limited the responsibility of one who caused a accidental fire in case of gross negligence was incompatible with the constitution.

참고자료

· 없음