Open Decision Ledger · Civil procedure & enforcement
Alternative damages claim and voluntary payment after execution becomes impossible
Supreme Court, July 25, 2024, 2021Da239905 (judgment)
Case name: 청구이의
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
When a creditor sues for delivery of a thing on a contractual claim and, in case that relief becomes unenforceable, also for damages, what is the legal nature of the joined damages claim, when does the alternative claim right arise, and does the debtor's voluntary tender afterwards still have the effect of performing the original obligation?
Holding
The damages claim joined to a claim for delivery is a claim for compensation for delay under Article 395 of the Civil Act or for non-performance under Article 390, and the joinder is a simple joining of a present original performance claim and a future alternative performance claim arising after the close of oral argument in the court of fact. Where enforcement of the original performance begun on a judgment ordering both performances becomes impossible, the creditor may refuse receipt of the original performance, and unless there are special circumstances such as the creditor receiving it, the debtor's voluntary tender does not have the effect of performing that obligation. Enforceability of a provisionally executable judgment arises at once on its pronouncement subject to release, so where such enforcement becomes impossible before the judgment becomes final, the alternative claim right arises at that point unless that judgment or the provisional execution is later cancelled or varied.
Summary of the holding, verbatim
따라서 그 후 채무자가 임의로 본래적 급부를 제공하더라도 채권자가 이를 수령하는 등의 특별한 사정이 없는 한 그로써 바로 본래적 급부에 관한 의무 이행의 효력이 발생한다고 볼 수 없다.
Unofficial English translation
Accordingly, even if the debtor thereafter voluntarily provides the original performance, unless there are special circumstances such as the creditor receiving it, the effect of performance of the obligation concerning the original performance cannot be regarded as arising immediately by virtue thereof.
Disposition
Dismissed Stated in the decision
상고를 모두 기각한다. 상고비용은 원고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
All appeals are dismissed. The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Form of the test
Elements stated Stated in the decision
이러한 청구의 병합은 현재의 급부청구인 본래적 급부청구와 사실심 변론종결 후에 발생하는 장래의 급부청구인 대상적 급부청구의 단순병합에 해당한다.
Unofficial English translation
The joinder of such claims constitutes a simple joinder of the original claim for performance, which is a claim for present performance, and the substitute claim for performance, which is a claim for future performance arising after the close of oral argument in the fact-finding courts.
Factors
- 그중 대상적 급부인 손해배상청구는 민법 제390조의 이행불능으로 인한 전보배상 또는 민법 제395조의 이행지체로 인한 전보배상을 구하는 것으로서
- 본래적 급부에 대한 강제집행에 착수하였으나 그것이 집행불능이 되어 대상적 급부청구권이 발생하면
- 채권자가 이를 수령하는 등의 특별한 사정이 없는 한
- 가집행선고부 판결의 집행력은 후일 본안판결 또는 가집행선고가 취소·변경될 것을 해제조건으로 그 선고 즉시 발생하므로
Unofficial English translation
• Among them, the substitute claim for performance, namely the claim for damages, seeks compensatory damages for impossibility of performance under Article 390 of the Civil Act or compensatory damages for delay in performance under Article 395 of the Civil Act, and
• where compulsory execution against the original performance has been commenced, but execution has become impossible and the substitute claim for performance has arisen,
• unless there are special circumstances such as the creditor receiving it,
• the enforceability of a judgment with a declaration of provisional execution arises immediately upon its pronouncement, subject to the resolutory condition that the judgment on the merits or the declaration of provisional execution may later be rescinded or modified, and therefore
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 1975. 5. 13. 선고 75다308 판결(공1975, 8461)
Unofficial English translation
Supreme Court Decision 75Da308 decided May 13, 1975 (Gong 1975, 8461)
Decisions referred to
대법원 1960. 5. 19. 선고 4292민상719 판결, 대법원 1975. 5. 13. 선고 75다308 판결(공1975, 8461), 대법원 1984. 6. 26. 선고 84다카320 판결(공1984, 1285), 대법원 1990. 12. 11. 선고 90다카27129 판결(공1991, 472), 대법원 2006. 1. 27. 선고 2005다39013 판결, 대법원 2010. 7. 29. 선고 2010다35497, 35503 판결
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
If the creditor keeps the tendered performance without expressly refusing it, does that alone amount to the special circumstance of receipt that makes the original performance effective?
A later decision on what counts as receipt under Article 395 of the Civil Act would change how the open question is answered. Any amendment to the effect of provisional execution under Article 24 or Article 56(2) of the Civil Execution Act, or to Articles 390 and 395 of the Civil Act, also calls for this entry to be read again.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
8 of 8 axes matched GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI, codex CLI) · 2026-10-25
A reader from another model family (GPT-6 Astra), given the official text but not the primary reading, agreed on all 8 axes.
Raw responses and comparison record: Protocol · Blind readings (JSONL) · Axis comparison (JSONL) · SHA-256 (JSON)
Lower-court contrast & scope of application
Lower-court reading vs. Supreme Court holding
Lower-court context: The court below held that the effect of the execution becoming impossible took effect at the time of the enforcement carried out on the provisional execution endorsement before the precedent judgment became final, and that the defendants thereby acquired the right to choose which of the original and alternative claim rights to enforce. It therefore held that the plaintiff's unilateral transfer of the company's shares to the defendants' securities accounts after that judgment became final was not performance according to the tenor of the obligation and had no effect as payment.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court found no error. Reading the appellate reasons against the law it stated and the record, it held that the court below had not misapplied the requirements for exercising the damages claim or the effect of performance of the original obligation, nor breached the rules on free evaluation of evidence, and it dismissed the appeal in full on the unanimous opinion of the participating Justices.
Distinguishing conditions
- A case in which the creditor receives the tendered original performance, since the Court held that the effect of performance does not arise unless there are special circumstances such as receipt.
- A case in which the judgment ordering both performances or its provisional execution endorsement has been cancelled or varied, so that the alternative claim right had not arisen at the point of impossibility.
- A case in which the creditor had not yet begun enforcement of the original performance, since the alternative claim right here arose when that enforcement became impossible.
Record verification notes
Trace the order of events: when the provisionally executable judgment was pronounced, when enforcement began, when the impossibility record was drawn up and on what ground, and whether the judgment or the provisional execution was later cancelled or varied. Then look for any act showing the creditor received or refused the tendered performance, since the Court listed receipt as one example of the special circumstances. Keep the claim rights apart, because the defendants' choice between them arose with the impossibility.
From the official text
Points at issue
채권적 청구권에 기해 물건의 인도를 구함과 동시에 집행불능에 대비하여 손해배상을 구하는 경우, 그 손해배상청구의 법적 성질(=이행불능 또는 이행지체로 인한 전보배상의 청구) 및 이러한 청구의 병합은 현재의 급부청구인 본래적 급부청구와 장래의 급부청구인 대상적 급부청구의 단순병합에 해당하는지 여부(적극) / 본래적 급부의 이행과 함께 대상적 급부의 이행을 명한 판결이 선고되고 이에 기초하여 본래적 급부에 대한 강제집행에 착수하였으나 집행불능이 되어 대상적 급부청구권이 발생한 경우, 채무자가 임의로 본래적 급부를 제공하면 본래적 급부에 관한 의무 이행의 효력이 발생하는지 여부(원칙적 소극) / 본래적 급부의 이행과 함께 대상적 급부의 이행을 명한 판결이 확정되기 전에 가집행선고부 판결에 기하여 한 본래적 급부에 대한 강제집행이 집행불능에 이른 경우, 그 집행불능 시점에 대상적 급부청구권이 발생하는지 여부(원칙적 적극)
Unofficial English translation
Where, on the basis of a claim under an obligatory right, delivery of an object is sought and, at the same time, damages are sought in anticipation of impossibility of execution, the legal nature of such claim for damages (= a claim for compensatory damages for impossibility of performance or for delay in performance) and whether the joinder of such claims constitutes a simple joinder of the original claim for performance, which is a claim for present performance, and the substitute claim for performance, which is a claim for future performance (affirmative) / Where a judgment ordering the performance of the substitute claim for performance together with the performance of the original performance has been rendered, compulsory execution against the original performance has been commenced on the basis thereof, execution has become impossible, and the substitute claim for performance has arisen, whether the effect of performance of the obligation concerning the original performance arises if the debtor voluntarily provides the original performance (principally negative) / Where compulsory execution against the original performance, commenced on the basis of a judgment with a declaration of provisional execution before the judgment ordering the performance of the substitute claim for performance together with the performance of the original performance becomes final, has reached impossibility of execution, whether the substitute claim for performance arises at the time of such impossibility of execution (principally affirmative)
Summary of the holding
채권적 청구권에 기하여 물건의 인도를 구함과 동시에 그 집행불능에 대비하여 손해배상을 구하는 경우, 그중 대상적 급부인 손해배상청구는 민법 제390조의 이행불능으로 인한 전보배상 또는 민법 제395조의 이행지체로 인한 전보배상을 구하는 것으로서, 이러한 청구의 병합은 현재의 급부청구인 본래적 급부청구와 사실심 변론종결 후에 발생하는 장래의 급부청구인 대상적 급부청구의 단순병합에 해당한다. 대상적 급부로서 이행지체로 인한 전보배상을 구하여 본래적 급부의 이행과 함께 대상적 급부의 이행을 명한 판결이 선고되고, 그에 기초하여 본래적 급부에 대한 강제집행에 착수하였으나 그것이 집행불능이 되어 대상적 급부청구권이 발생하면, 채권자는 본래적 급부에 대한 수령을 거절할 수 있게 된다(민법 제395조 참조). 따라서 그 후 채무자가 임의로 본래적 급부를 제공하더라도 채권자가 이를 수령하는 등의 특별한 사정이 없는 한 그로써 바로 본래적 급부에 관한 의무 이행의 효력이 발생한다고 볼 수 없다. 나아가 가집행선고부 판결의 집행력은 후일 본안판결 또는 가집행선고가 취소·변경될 것을 해제조건으로 그 선고 즉시 발생하므로, 본래적 급부의 이행과 함께 대상적 급부의 이행을 명한 판결이 확정되기 전에 그 가집행선고부 판결에 기하여 한 본래적 급부에 대한 강제집행이 집행불능에 이른 경우에도 이후 위 판결 또는 가집행선고가 취소·변경되지 않는 한 그 집행불능의 시점에 대상적 급부청구권이 발생한다.
Order
상고를 모두 기각한다. 상고비용은 원고가 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
All appeals are dismissed. The costs of the final appeal shall be borne by the plaintiff.
Provisions referred to
민법 제390조, 제395조, 민사소송법 제213조, 제248조, 제251조, 제253조, 민사집행법 제24조, 제56조 제2호
Read 2026-10-25 · Cross-read 2026-10-25. All quotes matched against the official text. The Chinese-character placeholders the court used for anonymised parties are given in their Korean readings, and parenthetical Chinese-character glosses are omitted.
Every entry is published only after all quotes have been matched character by character against the official text, and audited by an independent second reading from a different model family across all eight axes. Both agreed axes and text-grounded interpretive divergences are recorded openly. The ledger is a research record, not an assessment of the court or advice on any matter.
Back to the ledger