The need to establish justice in contracts has always been the subject of many challenges in legal doctrine. Most of these challenges are related to the differences in explaining the concept of justice and the different methods of its implementation, especially in the context of corrective justice. Therefore, the main challenge of this article is to analytically examine the concept of corrective justice, explain its position in the field of contract law, and examine its important examples with an emphasis on the Iranian legal system. In the end, it is clear that today corrective justice is applied in the field of contracts on the assumption that the benefit of one party to the contract is equal to the loss of the other party. The result is the correction of wrongful acts in the implementation of contracts and the restoration of the previous economic and legal balance of the parties to the initial situation. This efficient face of justice is current in various forms, including disgorgement (return of benefits resulting from breach of contract), compensation for expected benefits, and the rule of interpretation against the drafter. In this regard, a careful review of the capacities of Iranian legal regulations shows that despite some challenges and legal gaps, the possibility of aligning with the key components of this theory to improve the efficiency of performance guarantees is fully available and can pave the way for a fundamental transformation of the country's judicial practice.