[손해배상][집17(4)민,004]
Even if the performance has been made by an act of nullifying a violation of the mandatory law, such an act may be claimed for the return of the benefit or compensation for damages unless such an act damages the good public morals and other social order.
Even if the act that caused the payment of money is invalid to be in violation of an illegal act, it cannot be said that the act that caused the payment is in violation of good morals and other social order, so it cannot be said that the payment of money by the plaintiff is illegal.
Article 746 of the Civil Act
Plaintiff
Defendant
Seoul High Court Decision 68Na1520 decided May 7, 1969, Seoul High Court Decision 68Na1520 decided May 7, 1969
The appeal is dismissed.
The costs of appeal shall be borne by the defendant.
As to the Defendant’s Attorney’s ground of appeal:
The judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant's tort based on the evidence stated in the judgment below is not acceptable, and it cannot be adopted to criticize the whole matters of the court below on the determination of the evidence and the fact-finding, and the illegal cause stipulated in Article 746 of the Civil Code refers to a violation of good morals and other social order, and even if the act is performed by an invalid act that violates the mandatory law, if the act is not detrimental to good morals and other social order, the return of the profit or claim for damages can be made according to the principles of unjust enrichment or tort. Thus, even if the act of the plaintiff's act which caused the payment of the money violates the Foreign Exchange Control Act, it cannot be said that the act that caused the payment is in violation of good morals and other social order. Thus, the judgment of the court below that recognized the defendant's tort and the defendant's obligation to compensate for damages is just, and the arguments are not accepted. All of the arguments are without merit.
Therefore, according to Articles 400, 395, and 384 of the Civil Procedure Act, it is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating judges.
The two judges of the Supreme Court (Presiding Judge) the Red Net Sheet