• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.53
• /
• pp.135-153
• /
• 2012

Incoterms is a standard transaction terms and conditions which is established to provide goods delivery, cost and risks between the seller and the buyer as a principle concerned. Incoterms is made of international rules about regular uses of transaction terms and condition. It removes uncertainty of misunderstanding and applying rules, commercial customs and etc, between nations. Incoterms does not have an enforcement like an unified rules or an agreements established between different nations. Therefore, it is just considered as a standard formal terms and conditions from International Chamber of Commerce. For those reasons, validity of Incoterms applies only when parties of contract come to an agreement not by officially adopted or applied by law in each nation. Incoterms 2010 contains specific and clear articles which is fixed version of incoterms 2000, it has insufficient points on insurance contract article. Though, insurance contract belongs to sales contract, it sustains independence itself. It is difficult to sustain perfection until establishment of insurance contract and expiration by fixing the articles. As a result, it is necessary for sellers and buyers take a full responsibility of making complete insurance contract. This paper is written for those reasons in this filed.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.111-130
• /
• 2014

The article 742(2) of the Korean Commercial Code allowed the third party to invoke a direct action against the insurer under a liability insurance. Meanwhile, the owners of the vessel enter into the P&I Insurance Contract with the P&I Club to indemnify all kinds of liability or expenses involved in the operation of its vessel. However, the Rule Book under the P&I Insurance mostly included the Pay to be Paid Clause which precludes the third party's direct action. Recently, the Seoul Central District Court passed a judgement on the validity of the Pay to be Paid Clause under the Korean law against the third party i.e. the cargo insurer having the right of subrogation. The court held that (1) the third party's right of direct action is not the right to claim insurance money but the right to claim damages against the P&I Club, (2) the insurer under a liability insurance is deemed to assume liability jointly and severally with the insured against the third party, (3) the Article 742(2) of the Korean Commercial Code is considered as a compulsory provision because it was invented to protect the innocent third party, the Paid to be Paid Clause is thus null and void. The purpose of this article is to evaluate the appropriateness of this court's judgments by comparative analysis of Korean and English law, and to suggest the relevant amendments of the Korean Commercial Code in order to prevent further legal disputes. The article criticizes the decision of the Seoul Central District Court, taking the attitude that, since the third party's right is the right to claim insurance money, the Paid to be Paid Clause is valid against the third party.

• 월간 기계설비
• /
• s.240
• /
• pp.38-41
• /
• 2010

국토부는 하수급인의 계약상 이익을 부당하게 제한하는 특약유형을 구체화하고 하도급대금 직접지급 공공기관의 범위 확대 등의 내용을 담은 건설산업기본법 시행령 개정안을 지난 5월 27일 공포하고, 6월 30일부터 시행에 들어갔다. 다만, 건설근로자 퇴직공제 가입대상 공사범위 확대 관련 조항은 9월 30일부터 시행에 들어간다. 개정된 시행령은 하수급인의 계약상 이익을 부당하게 제한하는 특약유형을 보험료 미지급, 하자담보책임 전가, 하도급대금 조정 미반영 등으로 구체화 했으며 하도급대금 직접지급 공공기관의 범위를 공기업, 한국농어촌공사, 한국철도시설공단, 지방직영기업, 지방공사 및 지방공단 등으로 확대했다.

• The Journal of the Korean life insurance medical association
• /
• v.25
• /
• pp.63-77
• /
• 2006

The definition of 'critical cancer' in critical insurance(CI) is more insurance meanings than medical meanings. The difference between critical cancer of insurance and critical cancer of medical cancer is made difficult problem to the underwriting of insurer, contractor and medical doctor. The limited factors of underwriting in critical cancer of critical insurance as follows: (1) the limitation factors in the definition of 1st item critical cancer in CI 1) the definition differences of meanings in insurer, contractor, and medical doctor 2) the meanings of "the table of malignance" 3) the definition difference between 'critical cancer' and 'a large of medical expense cancer' (2) the limitation factors in the definition of second item critical cancer in CI 1) The limitation in the change of cancer character 2) The missing malignancy in pathological result due to localized cancer 3) The differences in the test result of hospital (3) the limitation factors in the definition of third item critical cancer in CI. 1) the lower items disobey the higher items 2) clinical malignancy of benign cancer pathologically 3) others: (1) low grade of malignant melanoma (2) early prostate cancer. (3) malignancy related HIV (4) all skin cancer excepted malignant melanoma (5) accepted clinically and a medical certificate by medical doctor as critical cancer of premalignant lesion, carcinoma-in-situ, and borderline cancer.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.139-175
• /
• 2017

The Assembly plenary session on December 3, 2017 passed a Product Liability Amendment bill that introduced clauses concerning consumer burden of proof and punitive damage reimbursement. More specifically, these newly approved provisions will reduce the burden of proof placed on consumers and levy triple punitive damage on suppliers. Significant increases in the number of product-liability lawsuit and the number of related insurance contracts are expected. Since military aircraft are designed for operational purpose(seeking greater combat effectiveness over greater safety) and used in high-risk environment, it is practically impossible to obtain an affordable product-liability insurance, Without having any backup plan, military aircraft manufacturers directly face all sort of liability risks under Product Liability Act, Warrant Liability Act and Non-Performance of Contract Act. The U.S. experienced similar problems when they first implemented their product-liability law in 1970s. There had been a big dispute among legal practitioner, insurance professionals and scholars concerning military aircraft manufacturer's liability. In order to settle the issue, the U.S. Supreme Court has established a new precedent of Government Contractor Defense(GCD). The U.S. government also included an indemnity clause for military aircraft manufacturers in their FMS Contract with the Korean government. Likewise, Korean military aircraft manufacturers should 1) clearly understand their current position that they cannot afford expensive product-liability insurance and the cost is not accounted in the military procurement calculation, 2) estimate potential liability risks with the ongoing overseas export expansion in mind, 3) set up appropriate risk management measures through regulatory reform and policy development.

• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.20 no.6
• /
• pp.3-10
• /
• 2019

The entire duration of the long-term continuous construction contract project cannot be expected when calculating the initial budget as the construction of the contract is carried out annually according to the budget composition. In addition, the statutes related to the defect liability and execution of contracts have not been established systematically in relation to the contract. Therefore, there are many problems at the actual construction site with regard to the defect liability or the performance of the contract in relation to the contract. In this study, the following improvement directions were presented for the efficient operation of the contracts: First, the defect liability is legal and should be specified in an Act rather than an enforcement decree. Second, if the parties to the contract vary in the following order in the contract, the special agreement should be specified in the enforcement decree. Third, in the event of an indirect cost due to the extension of the period of the long-term continuous work, the contingency items of the total project cost management policy should be utilized. Fourth, in the case of general construction contract conditions, clauses related to the purchase of the premium of the CAR, inspection, taking over, defect repair, and defect inspection shall be supplemented.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.31 no.1
• /
• pp.3-36
• /
• 2016

Recently, the Supreme Court of Korea delivered a milestone judgment about air related multimodal transport. At there, the mattered cargo, some expensive jewellery, was transported from Qingdao, China to downtown office of consignee at Seoul via Incheon airport in Korea. As an air waybill was issued in this case, there was an air transport agreement between consignor and air courier operator. After arriving at Incheon airport, the shipment was transport by land arranged by the air courier operator, who was a defendant in this case. Upon arriving at the final destination, it was found that the jewellery was lost partly and based on circumstantial evidence, the damage presumed to be occurred during the land transport. As a subrogee, the insurance company who paid for consignee filed an action against the air courier operator for damage compensation. Defendant contended that Montreal convention should be applicable in this case mainly for limited liability. The lower court of this case confirmed that applying the limited liability clause under Montreal Convention is improper under the reason that the damage in this case was or presumed to be occurred during surface transport. It was focused on the Montreal Convention article 18 which says that the period of the carriage by air does not extend to any carriage by land, by sea or by inland waterway performed outside an airport. However, the Supreme Court overturned the lower court's decision. The delivered opinion is that the terms of condition on the air waybill including limited liability clause should be prevailed in this case. It seems that the final judgment was considered the fact that the only contract made in this case was about air transport. This article is for analysis the above decisions from the perspective that it is distinguishable between a pure multimodal transport and an expanded air transport. The main idea of this article is that under the expanded air transport, any carriage by land, sea or inland waterway only for the performance of a contract for carriage by air, for the purpose of loading, delivery or transhipment is still within the scop of air transport.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.169-189
• /
• 2006

In 2007, KSLV(Korea Small Launching Vehicle) that we made at Goheung National Space Center is going to launch and promotes of our space exploration systematically and 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' was enter into force. 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' article 3, section 1, as is prescribing "Korean government keeps the space treaties contracted with other countries and international organizations and pursues after peaceful uses of outer space." The representative international treaties are Outer Space Treaty (1967) and Liability Convention (1972) etc. In Liability convention article 2, "A launching State shall be absolutely liable to pay compensation for damage caused by its space object on the surface of the earth or to aircraft in flight. The important content of the art. 2 is the responsible entity is the 'State' not the 'Company'. According by Korean Space Exploration Act art. 14, person who launches space objects according to art. 8 and art. 11 must bear the liability for damages owing to space accidents of the space objects. Could Korean government apply the Products Liability Act which is enter into force from July 1, 2002 to space launching person? And what is the contact type between Korea Aerospace Research Institute(KARl) and Russia manufacturer. Is that a Co-Development contract or Licence Product contract? And there is no exemption clause to waive the Russia manufacturer's liability which we could find it from other similar contract condition. If there is no exemption clause to the Russia manufacturer, could we apply the Korean Products Liability Act to Russia one? The most important legal point is whether we could apply the Korean Products Liability Act to the main component company. According by the art. 17 of the contract between KARl and the company, KARl already apply the Products Liability Act to the main component company. For reference, we need to examine the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, this case is that long distance electricity communication satellite of Western Union Telegraph company possessions fails on track entry. In Western Union's insurance company supplied to Western Union with insurance of $ 105 millions, which has the satellite regard as entirely damage. Five insurance companies -Appalachian insurance company, Commonwealth insurance company, Industrial Indemnity, Mutual Marine Office, Northbrook Excess & Surplus insurance company- went to court against McDonnell Douglases, Morton Thiokol and Hitco company to inquire for fault and strict liability of product. By the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, KARl should waiver the main component's product liability burden. And we could study the possibility of the adapt 'Government Contractor Defense' theory to the main component company.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.44
• /
• pp.465-485
• /
• 2013

Mit dem Patientenrechtegesetz, das im $Fr{\ddot{u}}jahr$ 2013 in Kraft treten soll, $f{\ddot{u}}rt$ der Gesetzgeber eine jahrzehntelange Diskussion um die Rechte von Patientinnen und Patienten zu einem guten Ende. Demnach geht es darum, Transparenz ${\ddot{u}}ber$ die bereits heute bestehenden, umfangreichen Rechte der Patientinnen und Patienten herzustellen, die $tats{\ddot{a}}chliche$ Durchsetzung dieser Rechte zu verbessern, zugleich Patientinnen und Patienten im Sinne einer verbesserten Gesundheitsversorgung zu $sch{\ddot{u}}tzen$ und insbesondere im Fall eines Behandlungsfehlers $st{\ddot{a}}rker$ zu $unterst{\ddot{u}}tzen$. In Verfolgung dieser Zwecke $schl{\ddot{a}}gt$ die Bundesregierung ein Artikelgesetz vor, dessen wesentliche Teile das BGB und das Recht der sozialen Krankenversicherung betreffen. In das BGB soll ein neuer Abschnitt ${\ddot{u}}ber$ den "Behandlungsvertrag" $eingef{\ddot{u}}gt$ werden. Als Standort ist der ${\ddot{U}}bergang$ vom Dienstin das Werkvertragsrecht vorgesehen, der um die neu zu schaffenden Vorschriften der ${\S}{\S}$ 630 a bis 630 h BGB erweitert wird. Die acht Paragrafen enthalten im Kern eine Kodifikation der von der Rechtsprechung entwickelten $Grunds{\ddot{a}}tze$ zur Arzthaftung. Der Beitrag stellt die bisherige politische Diskussion des Patientenrechtegesetzes vor (II). Im Anschluss daran wird die einzige wesentliche Neuerung des Gesetzes $n{\ddot{a}}her$ untersucht und werden Regelungsziel und Grundkonzept der Kodifikation einer $Pr{\ddot{u}}fung$ unterzogen (III). $Schlie{\ss}lich$ werden einen politischen Ausblick auf die neuen Herausforderungen und die Bewertung der $gegenw{\ddot{a}}rtigen$ Lage und der erwarteten Entwicklung gezogen (IV).

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.47-56
• /
• 2020

This study analyzed the recreational scuba diving regulations in Korea and other foreign countries and it proposes five changes to improve the Act On The Safety, Promotion, Etc. Of Underwater Leisure Activities in Korea. First, "recreational underwater activity participant" should be modified to refer to 'an individual or group of individuals entering into a contract with a recreational underwater activity businessperson for their own use'. Second, the person setting up the recreational underwater activity zone should be expanded to 'recreational underwater activity businessperson and/or recreational underwater activity participant'. Third, since recreational technical diving uses nitrox or mixed gas, a clause should be added that a sticker or band clearly indicating the type of gas should be attached. Fourth, a Surface Marker Buoy (SMB) should be added to the diving equipment, and the daily management and maintenance of cylinders should be specified in detail. Fifth, it is necessary to specify in the Act that recreational underwater activity participants are encouraged to purchase diving insurance for their own use. In addition, for the safety of underwater activity participants, the Act must specifically state the emergency procedures and diving guidelines of a recreational underwater activity businessperson.