채권양도금지 특약과 채권양도의 제3자에 대한 대항요건에 관한 비교법적 연구

Abstract

At the time of the enactment of the Korean Civil Code, the provision regarding anti-assignment clauses and perfection of the assignment of claims against third parties were referred to the Japanese Civil Code. However, in 2017, Japan significantly revised Article 466 of its Civil Code, which deals with the anti-assignment clause. The provisions of the Japanese Civil Code regarding perfection of the assignment of claims against third parties were referred to the French Civil Code when Japan enacted its Civil Code in 1896. However, France revised its Civil Code to adopt a written form requirement for the contract of assignment of claims (French Civil Code, Article 1322), and removed the requirement of notification to the debtor for perfection of the assignment of claims against third parties, so that perfection of the assignment against third parties is acquired at the time of the conclusion of the assignment agreement (French Civil Code, Article 1323). The German Civil Code, from the beginning, stipulates that perfection of the assignment against third parties is acquired at the time of the conclusion of the assignment contract, and notification to the debtor is not a requirement. Considering these global revision trends, it is desirable to consider revision of the Korean Civil Code regarding anti-assignment clauses and perfection of the assignment of claims against third parties. As a proposed revision to the Korean Commercial Code, the introduction of a provision specifically dealing with receivables can also be considered. According to this proposal, for non-monetary claims, the assignment of claims would be void if the assignee is aware (or grossly negligent) of the anti-assignment clause, and the assignment would be valid if the assignee is unaware under the Korean Civil Code; and in the case of commercial receivables, the assignment of receivables would be valid regardless of whether the assignee is aware or unaware of the anti-assignment clause, thereby protecting the safety of transactions involving receivables under the proposed Commercial Code revision. An analysis of overseas legislation shows that there are few examples of legislation that stipulate notification to the debtor as a requirement for perfection of the assignment of receivables against third parties. With France’s revision of its Civil Code, the Japanese Civil Code is almost the only example of such legislation. It is time for Korea to consider a revision that liberates the assignor from the obligation to notify the debtor in order to perfect the assignment against third parties. To alleviate the burden of notifying the debtor of the assignment of receivables, it is necessary to revise the Act on Security over Movable Assets and Receivables to include the assignment of receivables within its scope of application.