在契約法的發展過程中，調和契約自由與契約正義的緊張關係，或契約自由的範圍及內容控管的界限，殆屬最具爭議問題之一。雖然藉由法院裁判以形成司法控制，早已成為廣泛承認的事實，但在方法論上，如何建構更切合現實的模型，而更能發揮引導實務運作的功能，乃成為當代契約法的重大挑戰之一。本文藉由實務案例的觀察，認為考量結果早已是法院裁判的實然，而就契約的司法控制而言，本文主張結果導向方法的引進，將為契約法的適用過程注入新元素。同時，為使理論建構得以切合詮釋實務運作的功能，本文初步嘗試針對我國民事裁判，發掘其中可能涉及結果導向方法的相關案例，並試圖藉由所提理論架構的分析，建立基本類型及解析運作模式，以供未來理論分析及實務運作的參考。 The problems regarding the conciliation of the tensions between the freedom and justice of contracts, or the judicial review of contracts from the aspect of contemporary development, can be evaluated as one of the most controversial disputes in modern contract law. Taking into account the fact that the judicial review of contracts has been recognized comprehensively not only in the Anglo-American but also in the European-Continental legal system, the development of a pragmatic mechanism in methodology, which the court may apply in dealing with the cases concerning the judicial review of contracts, seems to have a highly significant value. It is argued in this article that consequentialist arguments in broad meaning are widely accepted in judicial argumentation. On the other hand, the vague definition and inaccurate scope of this method has led to a relatively obscure phenomenon of the application of legal method. In order to establish a set of pragmatic methodological rules and principles, this article attempts to introduce a framework of consequentialist arguments in a narrow sense, by which the cases in practice would be analyzed and evaluated. It is the hope of the author that this framework could contribute to the explanation of the realistic process of decision making in court, and also to the establishment of a guideline for judges who are struggling for a better resolution in hard cases.