착오에 의한 계좌이체의 법률관계 (Legal Problems of Account Transfer through Mistake)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 인하대학교 법학연구소
· 수록지 정보 : 법학연구 / 16권 / 1호 / 225 ~ 252페이지
· 저자명 : 배병일

초록

착오로 인한 계좌이체의 법률관계는 지급인과 지급은행, 수취은행, 수취인의 4당사자의 법률관계이다. 지급인이 착오로 수취인에게 아무런 법률관계없이 이체 송금한 경우에 지급인은 수취인에 대하여 부당이득반환을 청구할 수 있다. 이 경우 수취인과 수취은행간에는 예금계약이 성립하고, 수취인은 수취은행에 대하여 예금채권을 취득한다. 그러나 지급인은 수취은행에 대해서는 수취은행이 아무런 이득을 얻지 못했기 때문에 부당이득반환을 청구할 수 없다. 수취인은 수취은행에 대하여 예금채권을 취득하기 때문에, 수취은행은 수취인에 대한 대출채권을 자동채권으로 하고, 위 예금채권을 수동채권으로 하여 상계할 수 있다. 그러나 상계는 일정한 경우에 상계권 행사가 신의칙에 어긋나서 권리남용이 된다. 지급인이 착오로 수취인의 계좌에 입금된 경우라도 예금채권이 성립하고, 수취인의 채권자는 예금채권에 대하여 압류를 할 수 있다.

영어초록

This paper is an article which written about the resolution of juridical relation of payer's mistaken transfer. There are many problems of legal structure which payer associated paying bank and receivable bank or remittee etc. There are three Acts related payer's mistaken transfer, that is Electronic Financial Transaction Act, Postal Transfer Act, Special Act on damage return of telefinancial fraud. There are no civil resolutions in three Acts. It was place civil legal problems on account transfer through mistake in the hands of theory and case.
This paper consist of four parts. First part is a introduction about why and how happened legal problems of account transfer through mistake in this time. Second part is general legal theory about legal problems of account transfer. Third part are legal problems of relationship which payer and remittee are associated in account transfer through mistake, and payer and receivable bank are associated with unjust enrichment. In Japan, special commercial practice about the rescission of payment order is Jowhan(組還) as return. But it would be difficult that is payer claim for return of unjust enrichment to receivable bank without such commercial practice in Korea. Korean Supreme Court decided payer did not claim for of unjust enrichment to receivable bank because of no profit in receivable bank.
Furthermore, receivable bank and remittee are associated with account contract, and then remittee acquired the right of deposit on the receivable bank regardless of the existence of the real relation. Last part of this paper is conclusion which collect these matters are discussed. There has been enough disputed about account transfer through mistake, so expect this discussion to serve for further controversy questions in the future.

참고자료

· 없음