在契約實務中，一契約的內容經常不符當事人締約時原來的期待，而其原因其實相當多樣，例如因錯誤、受他方詐欺或脅迫，甚至因締約後情事變更皆有可能導致此一結果，另實務上亦頗常見的原因，則是一方當事人違反締約上說明義務，而使他方基於錯誤的資訊而締約。本文主要的目的，即在探討此類不符當事人期待的契約，若其依法得主張損害賠償，則其賠償的方法為何。本文探討德國法的學說與實務，獲得以下結果：若當事人欲保留已履行的給付，則得主張金錢賠償，若該給付對其無利益，則得主張契約之回復原狀，亦即，得退還原給付並請求返還價金。然而，以契約之回復原狀做為損害賠償方法，在我國實務上尚無實例，學界迄今亦乏詳細的研究，而本文認為，此一賠償方式在民法上可見其依據，在實務操作上亦甚簡便且符合當事人需求，頗值我國司法實務參考。

In the contract praxis, the content of a contract occasionally cannot meetthe original expectation of the parties in the course of contract negotiation. Thatcan be caused by different facts such as mistake, fraud, duress or even bychange of the circumstances. Additionally, that can also result from failure todisclose the information as well. This essay tries to research the possiblemethods of restoration of damage in case one of the contract parties has a claimfor that.After the analysis of this issue in German law, it is concluded that amonetary compensation is recommended if the party wants to keep theprestation received. On the other hand, it would be more beneficial to claim forrestitutio in integrum, if maintaining the prestation received is no interest to him.However, restitutio in integrum as a method of compensation for damage isunknown in the precedents of Taiwan Courts till now. Nevertheless, its legalfundament could be found in the civil code of Taiwan. It could also be anefficient way to restoration of damage in the praxis.