All
| TITLE | 【Syllabus of Latest Opinion】 Supreme Court Decision 2019Da261558 Decided April 25, 2024 【Damages (Etc.)】 [full Text] |
|---|---|
| Summary | |
| 【Main Issues and Holdings】 [1] Where an agreed payment for non-performance of an obligation is extravagant and unconscionable under the law of the United Kingdom, whether such agreed payment corresponds to an unenforceable penalty (affirmative) Standard of determining whether an agreed payment for the nonperformance of an obligation corresponds to liquidated damages or a penalty and in such a case, whether “a legitimate interest to compel the performance of contractual obligations of the other party” should be limited to compensation for the maximum amount of estimated damages resulting from a breach of the contract (negative) [2] Whether Article 398(2) of the Civil Act, which stipulates that where the amount of damages determined in advance is unduly excessive, the court may reduce the amount to a more reasonable and appropriate sum, may be included in international mandatory provisions stipulated in Article 7 of the former Act on Private International Law that should govern the corresponding legal relations irrespective of the applicable law (negative) Whether the application of the provisions of the law of the United Kingdom should be seen to correspond to “an evident violation of good customs and other social order of the Republic of Korea” stipulated in Article 10 of the former Act on Private International Law on the grounds that the amount of damages determined in advance cannot be separately reduced as a result of the application of the law of the United Kingdom, which is the applicable law (negative) | |
