Interpretation of 'renegotiation clause' andadjustment of contract

??????????????? ???????????????????????? ????????????????????? ???????????????????????? ??????????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????????. ???????????????????????? ????????? ??????????????? ???????????? ????????? ?????? ????????????, ??????????????? ?????? ??????????????? ??????????????? ???????????? ????????? ????????? ??????????????? ?????? ????????????????????? ??????????????? ??????????????? ?????? ????????? ?????????. ??????????????? ??? ????????? ????????? ???????????? ??? ?????? ????????? ?????? ??????. ??????, ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? ????????? “??????????????? ?????? ????????????, ?????? ?????? ????????????, ???·?????? ?????? ????????????, ?????? ?????? ????????? ???”?????? “????????????, ????????????, ????????????”??? “???????????????, ???????????????, ???????????????”??? ????????????, ????????? ????????? ????????????????????? ?????? ?????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????????. ??????, ????????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? ?????? ????????????????????? “?????? ???????????? ??????????????? ????????? ??? ??????”??? ????????? ????????? ?????????, ???????????? ????????? ?????? ???????????? ????????? ??????????????? ????????? ???????????? ????????? ?????? ????????? ???????????? ???????????? ?????? ????????? ??????????????? ?????? ??? ??????. ????????? ??? ??? ????????? ?????? ????????? ?????? ??????. ?????? ??? ?????? ??????????????? ??? ??????, ??????, ???????????? ????????? ?????????, ??????????????? ???????????? ????????? ????????? ?????? ????????? ???????????? ?????? ???????????????, ??????????????? ???????????? ????????? ?????? ????????? ????????? ??????????????? ???????????? ????????? ?????? ?????? ????????????. ?????????, ??? ????????? ????????? ??????????????? ???????????? ????????? ??????????????? ????????? ??????????????? ????????? ?????????, ??????????????? ??????????????? ?????????????????? ????????? ?????? ?????????????????? ????????? ???????????????, ??? ????????? ????????? ????????? ??????????????? ???????????? ?????? ???????????? ?????????. ?????? ??? ?????????????????? ?????? ?????????????????? ??????(???????????????)??? ??????????????? ????????? ???, ???????????????????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ???????????? ?????? ???????????? ?????? ????????? ???, ?????????????????? ??????????????? ????????? ?????? ????????? ????????? ?????? ?????? ????????? ??????????????? ?????? ?????????, ??????????????? ?????? ????????? ?????? ???????????? ???????????? ????????????. ????????? ????????? ?????? ??????(??????)??? ???????????? ???????????? ?????? ??????????????? ???????????? ?????? ???????????? ????????? ???????????? ????????????. ?????? ????????? ???????????? ????????? ??????????????? ???????????? ??? ????????????, ?????? ?????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ??? ??????????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ????????? ?????? ????????? ??????????????? ??????????????? ????????? ?????????.The Supreme court case (2008da44368) interpreted ``renegotiation clause`` in the on-line lottery system building and management contract as follows, and accordingly reduced the service provider`s fee ratio by court`s authority. "If contract parties fail to reach an agreement about modifying contract terms, court can adjust the contract terms" Perhaps, court may consider that through court`s adjustment (reducing service provider`s fee), the enormous profit from lottery sales can be used for the public good. And it seems against equity that the plaintiff (private service provider) get huge fee through lottery business. But basically, it is not the task of court but legislature to restrict private rights (contractual rights in this case) for the sake of public interest. Moreover, renegotiation clause in question states "parties can adjust fee ratio through discussion". Parties didn`t agree to modify in advance. When parties agreed to adjust contract but did not specify the contents of modified contract, court may fill the gap in the modified contract. Such intervention is preferable, because it fits with parties` will and private autonomy. But in this case, parties only agreed to discuss about adjustment. In this situation especially when parties are sophisticated and the matter about adjustment can be predictable at the contracting stage, courts` intervention may not be desirable, because it will increase the uncertainty about courts` decision and deter private autonomy. So, I have a doubt as to the reasoning of the case 2008da44368. And I think, it is hasty and indiscrete to generalize that reasoning and apply it to other cases about interpreting of renegotiation clause.??? ????????? 2012??? ??????????????? ??????????????? ???????????? ???????????????(HY-2012-N)