Open Decision Ledger · Civil obligations & remedies
Interest on money returned after rescission and the time for reducing liquidated damages
Supreme Court, Dec. 1, 2022, 2022Da259753 (judgment)
No holding summary · checked against points at issue. The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Case name: 매매대금반환
Official text on the National Law Information Center
Question
Where a court orders money returned as restoration after rescission, must interest run at the rate in Article 3(1) of the Special Act on Expediting Litigation from the day after service of the complaint, and at what point are the circumstances for reducing liquidated damages under Article 398(2) of the Civil Act weighed?
Holding
It must. Interest added under Article 548(2) of the Civil Act falls within the restoration obligation and is a species of unjust enrichment, not damages for delay; once an action for return is filed the debtor is in delay from the day after service. A stipulated amount is unduly excessive only where, weighing the parties' positions, the object and content of the contract, the motive for the stipulation, the ratio of the amount to the debt, the expected loss and the trade practice at the time, payment is found by ordinary social sense to place unfair pressure on the debtor, who stands in the position of the economically weak party, and to destroy fairness. The circumstances are weighed as they stand at the close of oral argument in the court of fact, and finding the grounds for reduction and fixing the ratio belong to that court's exclusive domain unless manifestly unreasonable in the light of fairness.
Points at issue, verbatim
민법 제548조 제2항에 따른 ‘이자 반환’의 법적 성질(=부당이득반환) / 계약해제로 인한 원상회복의무의 이행으로 금전의 반환을 명하는 판결을 선고하는 경우, 소장을 송달받은 다음 날부터 소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제3조 제1항에 의한 이율을 적용하여야 하는지 여부(적극)
Unofficial English translation
The legal nature of the "return of interest" under Article 548 (2) of the Civil Act (= restitution for unjust enrichment) / Whether, when a judgment ordering the return of money as performance of an obligation of restoration to the original state arising from rescission of a contract is rendered, the interest rate under Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition of Legal Proceedings must be applied from the day following the service of the complaint (affirmative)
Disposition
Reversed and rendered by the Supreme Court Stated in the decision
원심판결 중 22,076,900원에 대한 2013. 11. 22.부터 2019. 10. 30.까지의 이자 및 2019. 10. 31.부터 2021. 1. 12.까지의 지연손해금에 관한 원고 패소 부분을 파기하고, 그 부분에 관한 피고의 항소를 기각한다.
Unofficial English translation
The part of the judgment of the court below concerning the interest on 22,076,900 Korean won from November 22, 2013 to October 30, 2019 and the delay damages from October 31, 2019 to January 12, 2021, in which the plaintiff lost, is reversed, and the defendant's appeal as to that part is dismissed.
Form of the test
Circumstances weighed Stated in the decision
법원이 구체적으로 그 판단을 하는 때 즉, 사실심의 변론종결 당시를 기준으로 하여 그 사이에 발생한 위와 같은 모든 사정을 종합적으로 고려하여야 한다.
Unofficial English translation
The court must make the determination on a concrete basis, that is, at the time of the close of oral argument in the court of fact, and must comprehensively consider all circumstances such as those described above that have arisen in the meantime.
Factors
- 민법 제548조 제2항에 따른 ‘이자 반환’의 법적 성질(=부당이득반환)
- 소장을 송달받은 다음 날부터 소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제3조 제1항에 의한 이율을 적용하여야 하는지 여부(적극)
- 위 규정의 적용에 따라 손해배상의 예정액이 부당히 과다한지와 이에 대한 적절한 감액의 범위를 판단할 때 기준이 되는 시기(=사실심 변론종결 시)
- 이때 감액사유에 대한 사실인정과 비율확정이 사실심의 전권사항인지 여부(원칙적 적극)
Unofficial English translation
• The legal nature of the "return of interest" under Article 548 (2) of the Civil Act (= restitution for unjust enrichment)
• Whether the interest rate under Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition of Legal Proceedings must be applied from the day following the service of the complaint (affirmative)
• The point in time that serves as the criterion when, in applying the foregoing provision, it is determined whether the stipulated amount of damages is excessively disproportionate and the appropriate scope of reduction thereof (= the time of the close of oral argument in the court of fact)
• Whether the fact-finding as to the grounds for reduction and the determination of the ratio at that time fall within the exclusive province of the court of fact (affirmative in principle)
Relation to precedent
Follows earlier decisions Stated in the decision
대법원 2003. 7. 22. 선고 2001다76298 판결 등 참조
Unofficial English translation
See, e.g., Supreme Court Decision 2001Da76298 decided July 22, 2003
Decisions referred to
[1] 대법원 2003. 7. 22. 선고 2001다76298 판결(공2003하, 1757) / [2] 대법원 2017. 5. 30. 선고 2016다275402 판결(공2017하, 1367)
Burden of proof
Not addressed Not in the decision
Open question and revisit condition
Once a stipulated liquidated damages amount is held unduly excessive, what degree of reduction is appropriate, and how is the ratio fixed where the expected loss cannot be measured precisely?
A later decision treating the interest under Article 548(2) of the Civil Act as damages for delay rather than restitution would require this entry to be read again. An amendment to Article 398(2) of the Civil Act or to Article 3(1) of the Special Act on Expediting Litigation would also call for a fresh reading.
Cross-family AI independent reading & axis check
6 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 6 of the 8 axes; the readings differed on axis 4 (form of the test), axis 8 (open question and revisit condition).
Axis 4 (Form of the test): Primary “Circumstances weighed” vs Independent “Elements stated”
Primary labels the standard as a holistic weighing of circumstances, while independent labels it as stated requirements, though both describe the same list of factors.
계약해제로 인한 원상회복의무의 이행으로 금전의 반환을 명하는 판결을 선고하는 경우, 소장을 송달받은 다음 날부터 소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제3조 제1항에 의한 이율을 적용하여야 하는지 여부(적극)Axis 8 (Open question and revisit condition): Primary “Once a stipulated liquidated damages amount is held unduly excessive, what degree of reduction is appropriate, and how is the ratio fixed where the expected loss cannot be measured precisely?” vs Independent “Under what different circumstances would a trial court's reduction of agreed damages be manifestly unreasonable under equitable principles?”
Primary asks how far a reduction may go and how to fix the ratio when expected loss is hard to measure, while independent asks what other circumstances would make a reduction manifestly unreasonable.
민법 제548조 제2항에 따른 ‘이자 반환’의 법적 성질(=부당이득반환) / 계약해제로 인한 원상회복의무의 이행으로 금전의 반환을 명하는 판결을 선고하는 경우, 소장을 송달받은 다음 날부터 소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제3조 제1항에 의한 이율을 적용하여야 하는지 여부(적극)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 Cheongju District Court, in its judgment of 15 July 2022 (2021Na50868), held that part of the sale contract had been validly rescinded for impossibility of performance, and ordered the defendant to pay KRW 22,076,913 as restoration with delay damages from the day after service of the copy of the complaint. It dismissed the claim for statutory interest from the final payment of the price to the date of service, and allowed 5 per cent a year under the Civil Act up to the first-instance judgment and 12 per cent a year under the Special Act from the following day. On the liquidated damages clause it held that paying the whole stipulated amount was unduly excessive and reduced it to 20 per cent.
Supreme Court standard: The Supreme Court held that interest under Article 548(2) is restitution within the restoration obligation, so the defendant had to pay interest at the statutory rate from the date the price was received, and that on a restitution claim no reasonable contest over the existence and scope of the obligation was possible. The court below had misread the law on that interest and on the delay damages under the Special Act, with an effect on the outcome, so the part of the judgment against the plaintiff on the interest for KRW 22,076,900 from 22 November 2013 to 30 October 2019 and on the delay damages from 31 October 2019 to 12 January 2021 was reversed and the Court itself ordered 5 per cent a year to the service date and 12 per cent a year thereafter. On the third ground of appeal it found no error, since the reduction to 20 per cent did not rest on a failure to examine what was needed or on a departure from the limits of free evaluation of evidence.
Distinguishing conditions
- Money to be returned that does not arise from rescission of a contract as restoration, so that Article 548(2) of the Civil Act does not add interest to it.
- A claim in which the existence and scope of the defendant's obligation could reasonably be contested, since the finding that no such contest was possible rested on the restitution character.
- A liquidated damages clause that is not unduly excessive once the stated circumstances are weighed, so that no reduction arises.
Record verification notes
Set the receipt date of the price, the date the copy of the complaint was served and the date of the final payment side by side, since interest runs from receipt and the Special Act rate only from the day after service. Check whether the return sought is restitution after rescission, because the finding that the obligation could not reasonably be contested rested on that character. For any reduction, gather the circumstances as they stood at the close of oral argument, and note that the degree of reduction was left to the court of fact.
From the official text
Points at issue
[1] 민법 제548조 제2항에 따른 ‘이자 반환’의 법적 성질(=부당이득반환) / 계약해제로 인한 원상회복의무의 이행으로 금전의 반환을 명하는 판결을 선고하는 경우, 소장을 송달받은 다음 날부터 소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제3조 제1항에 의한 이율을 적용하여야 하는지 여부(적극) [2] 민법 제398조 제2항에서 정한 손해배상의 예정액이 ‘부당히 과다한 경우’의 의미 / 위 규정의 적용에 따라 손해배상의 예정액이 부당히 과다한지와 이에 대한 적절한 감액의 범위를 판단할 때 기준이 되는 시기(=사실심 변론종결 시) 및 이때 감액사유에 대한 사실인정과 비율확정이 사실심의 전권사항인지 여부(원칙적 적극)
Unofficial English translation
[1] The legal nature of the "return of interest" under Article 548 (2) of the Civil Act (= restitution for unjust enrichment) / Whether, when a judgment ordering the return of money as performance of an obligation of restoration to the original state arising from rescission of a contract is rendered, the interest rate under Article 3 (1) of the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition of Legal Proceedings must be applied from the day following the service of the complaint (affirmative) [2] The meaning of the case where the stipulated amount of damages prescribed in Article 398 (2) of the Civil Act is "excessively disproportionate" / The point in time that serves as the criterion when, in applying the foregoing provision, it is determined whether the stipulated amount of damages is excessively disproportionate and the appropriate scope of reduction thereof (= the time of the close of oral argument in the court of fact), and whether the fact-finding as to the grounds for reduction and the determination of the ratio at that time fall within the exclusive province of the court of fact (affirmative in principle)
Summary of the holding
The official text publishes no summary of the holding for this decision. The quotation and factors in this record are copied verbatim from the points at issue; the evidence for each axis is taken from the points at issue, the order and the reasons.
Order
원심판결 중 22,076,900원에 대한 2013. 11. 22.부터 2019. 10. 30.까지의 이자 및 2019. 10. 31.부터 2021. 1. 12.까지의 지연손해금에 관한 원고 패소 부분을 파기하고, 그 부분에 관한 피고의 항소를 기각한다. 원고의 나머지 상고를 기각한다. 소송총비용 중 50%는 원고, 나머지는 피고가 각 부담한다.
Unofficial English translation
The part of the judgment of the court below concerning the interest on 22,076,900 Korean won from November 22, 2013 to October 30, 2019 and the delay damages from October 31, 2019 to January 12, 2021, in which the plaintiff lost, is reversed, and the defendant's appeal as to that part is dismissed. The plaintiff's remaining final appeal is dismissed. Of the total costs of the lawsuit, 50% shall be borne by the plaintiff and the remainder by the defendant.
Provisions referred to
[1] 민법 제548조 제2항, 소송촉진 등에 관한 특례법 제3조 제1항 [2] 민법 제397조 제1항, 제398조 제1항, 제2항
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