일본 민법상의 채무불이행에 의한 손해배상청구권의 발생요건

According to Article 415 of the Japanese Civil Code before the amendment, in order for the liability for default to be established, the default of the debt must be attributable to the obligor. In order for the liability for default to be established, the objective fact that the obligor has not fulfilled the obligation is not enough, and there must be a reason for the obligor to be responsible. However, the current Japanese Civil Code, which was revised and enforced from April 1, 2020, abolished the traditional principle of negligence liability by deriving the liability for compensation due to default from the perspective of “binding force of contract.” The concept used by the current Japanese Civil Code to give up and replace negligence liability is “contract nonconformity responsibility,” and through this concept, the previous three-dividual theory of default (delay of perform, impossibility of perform, and incomplete performance) was transformed into the so-called “union theory of default.” This reflects the international trend of recent contract law (CISG, PICC, and PECL). However, Article 415 of the current Japanese Civil Code, which has been amended, is said to have several problems in that it is not clear what the content of the “binding force of the contract” is on which the liability for damages due to default is based. In other words, it is still necessary to review whether the current civil law has completely broken off from the conventional negligence responsibility or whether it is necessary to clarify the criteria to justify liability for damages. As described above, discussions on the current Japanese civil law revision process or problems under the current Japanese civil law after the revision reflect the recent international trend of contract law, so it is necessary to discuss it in the process of revising Korean civil law.