Browse > Article

The Legal nature of a contract for supply of a special purpose aircraft -The legitimacy of contract cancellation on the grounds that the performance specification is not satisfied in the purchase specification-  

Kwon, Chang-Young (Uijeongbu District Court)
Publication Information
The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy / v.31, no.2, 2016 , pp. 37-72 More about this Journal
Abstract
In the aerospace field, besides special purpose airplanes, contracts for supply of various types of products such as prototypes, unmanned aerial vehicles and space launch vehicles are increasing. In the case of the contractor, it was planned to spend a large amount of money to supply the production, but if the purchase specification that presents the quality and performance standard of the product is poor or lacks the capacity to judge the performance, consuming enormous amounts of time and money. Even if the undertaker does not have the ability to supply the products with the required performance and quality to achieve the purpose of the contract, he/she must pay the cost of burial due to the incompleteness of the work and the compensation for the cancellation of the contract. In this case, the defendant ordered the plaintiff to supply the aircraft by the Happy Box method, which is capable of ILS Offset flight as specified in the Purchase Specification, but the plaintiff attempted to supply the aircraft by the RNAV method. Although the ILS ground signal can be inspected by the RNAV method, the aircraft manufactured in the manner claimed by the plaintiff does not have the ILS Offset flight function required by the purchase specification, so the defendant can not achieve the purpose required by the purchase specification. It was a question of whether a defendant's cancellation of contract was legitimate. The aircraft, which is the object of this contract, is a subordinate substitute, so the case contract is of undertaking. Therefore, in order to complete the work in this contract, the major structural parts of the aircraft must be manufactured as agreed and have the performance generally required in the social sense. However, the aircraft delivered by the plaintiff has serious defects because the defendant can not achieve the purpose required by the purchase specification due to the lack of the ILS Offset flight function required by the purchase specification. This deficiency is impossible for the plaintiff to repair, so the defendant 's cancellation of the contract is legitimate.
Keywords
Special Purpose Aircraft; Contract for Supply; Undertaking Contract; Purchase Specification; Defect; Contract Cancellation;
Citations & Related Records
연도 인용수 순위
  • Reference
1 곽윤직 편집대표, 민법주해 XV, 채권(8), 박영사, 1997
2 박수곤, "도급계약의 현대화를 위한 법정책적 과제", 법과 정책연구 제12집 제4호, 2012. 12.
3 장준혁, "동산의 제작물공급계약의 성질결정", 민사판례연구 제35권, 2013. 2.
4 정진명, "소프트웨어개발계약의 법적 문제: 개발성과물에 대한 보증을 중심으로", 디지털재산법연구 제5권 제2호, 2006
5 전경운, "독일법상 매매와 도급에서의 하자담보책임과 기술적 표준", 비교사법 제17권 제1호, 2010. 3.
6 주석 민법 채권각칙(4) (제3판), 한국사법행정학회, 1999
7 Munchen Kommentar Burgerliches Gesetzbuch Schuldrecht Besonderer Teil II, 5. Auflage, C.H. Beck, 2009