• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.43 no.4
• /
• pp.89-110
• /
• 2018

This paper reviews the practical operations and exceptions to the independent principle by analyzing the leading cases of English documentary credit transactions. A bank's undertaking in L/C transactions differentiates between underlying contract and other contracts. The autonomy principle is the key principle governing L/C, but this principle may be connected with unfair (unjust) payment. English Law is strongly influenced by the developments in American Law in the case of fraud, but traditionally, British courts has been very reluctant to interfere in banks' independent undertaking under the L/C. The position of British case law relating to fraud is based on Sztejn. In practice, British courts recognize fraud as an exception to the autonomy principle in which the case is sufficiently serious to render it unjust to permit the beneficiary to receive payment. British case law has historically taken a narrow approach toward intervention in the independent principle of documentary credit. Therefore, innocent parties including beneficiaries are protected by these regulations regarding fraud.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.53
• /
• pp.553-591
• /
• 2017

This article discussed whether so-called 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' is in breach of public policy provided in Article 217(1)(3) of Civil Procedure Act and, if so, what the specific requirements could be. The summary of the conclusion is as follows. The 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' is against the municipal procedural public policy and then shall not be recognized. In this regard one more question comes up whether reviewing if 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' is in breach of the municipal procedural public policy is allowed in consideration of the principle of prohibition of $r{\acute{e}}vision$ au fond. Since the principle is applied entirely in the course of the above reviewing, it is allowed only when it does not breach the principle. The two instances that the reviewing is allowed are where the defendant was not able to produce evidences of fraud during foreign procedures and where the defendant's claim of fraud without evidences was rejected by the foreign court and then evidences of fraud were found after the foreign procedure was completed. On the other hand, the specific requirements for 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' to be against public policy are following four requirements based on principle of strict interpretation of public policy. (1) plaintiff's intention to fraud, (2) preventing the defendant from being involved in the procedure by fraud or cheating the foreign court using manipulated evidences, (3) the defendant could not present himself in the foreign court procedure due to the plaintiff's extraneous fraud or the foreign court decided wrongly due to intrinsic fraud, and (4) defendant's fundamental procedural rights were breached to the extent that recognizing the effect of foreign judgments was against justice defendant's fundamental procedural rights. These results differ from the Supreme Court 2004. 10. 28. ruling 2002da74213 in many aspects. Most of all, in my opinion there is no need to distinguish between intrinsic fraud and extraneous fraud and reviewing 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' is not in conflict with the principle of prohibition of $r{\acute{e}}vision$ au fond but the both may coexist. In this regard I expect the variation of the Supreme Court's position and hope to contribute to academia and practitioners.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.133-156
• /
• 2011

This paper is to analyze the legality in which the fraud rule allow the issuer of L/C or a court to disrupt the payment to the beneficiary under the deferred payment credit when the nominated bank for deferred payment undertaking made prepayment or negotiation before the maturity date and fraud is identified to be involved. Since the function of commercial L/C is to provide absolute assurance of payment to a beneficiary, the fraud rule based on fraud exception has been known as the negative factor which lead to the disruption of "principle of independence & abstraction" under the commercial L/C transactions. As a result, the fraud rule is necessary to limit the activities of fraudsters, but its scope must be carefully circumscribed so as not to deny commercial utility to an instrument that exists to serve as an assurance of payment. But the fraud itself has not been firmly established because it is inherently pliable in its concept. There are numerous contents to describe the application of fraud to the L/C transactions as a standard such as egregious fraud, intentional fraud, L/C fraud(omitted here), flexible fraud, and constructive fraud. And so the standard applicable to the commercial transaction as the fraud rule would be high or low depending upon the various standards of fraud.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.41 no.5
• /
• pp.15-39
• /
• 2016

Over the past couple of decades, we can see the emergence of a new lex mercatoria. It consists of international conventions or treaty, model laws and international principles. And such new lex mercatoria is driven by the international institutions such as UNCITRAL, UNIDROIT and ICC. The international convention and international principles in the field of international commercial transaction are considered : UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods(CISG) and The UNIDROIT Principles(PICC Principles). The former is the statue law for the latter, and the latter sometimes supports the former as an interpretation and supplementation of CISG. So, the purpose of this article is to evaluate and investigate the current status of CISG and PICC Principles in terms of application and interpretation principles. The results are as follows. First, PICC are used for the interpretation and supplementation of international law such as CISG, but CISG is a law, not a rule. Second, CISG and PICC Principles are not often chosen when parties chose the law governing their contract. The parties very often chose a national law ; the number of the parties choosing CISG and PICC Principles as a governing law was very low.

• The Korean Publising Journal, Monthly
• /
• s.83
• /
• pp.14-14
• /
• 1991

신라말부터 조선조에 이르는 도자기 변천사를 개관한 총론과 고려청자, 조선분청사기, 조선백자에 대한 각론으로 구성된 이 책은 전체적으로 한편의 논문형식을 띠고 있지만 그 세목세목은 30여년 발표해온 그의 논문을 토대로 하고 있는데 철저하게 '실물'에 기초한 과학적 규명을 원칙으로 하고 있다.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.67
• /
• pp.119-142
• /
• 2015

Many insurers have traditionally incorporated "fraud clauses" into insurance policies, setting out the consequences of making a fraudulent claim. Even in the absence of an express terms, English courts provide insurers with a remedy for a fraudulent claim. However, the law in this area is complex, convoluted and confused. English Law Commission think that the law in this area needs to be reformed for three reasons; (1) the disjunctive between the common law rule and section 17 generates unnecessary disputes and litigation, (2) increasingly, UK commercial law must be justified to an international insurance society, and (3) the rules on fraudulent claims are functioned as a deterrent if they are clear and well-understood. In order for these purposes, English Law Commission recommends a statutory regime to the effect that, when an insured commits fraud in relation to a claim, the insurer should (1) have no liability to pay the fraudulent claim and be able to recover any sums already paid in respect to the claim, and (2) have the option to treat the contract as having been terminated with from the time of the fraudulent act and, if chosen the option, be entitled to refuse all claims arising after the fraud, but (3) remain liable for legitimate losses before the fraudulent act. LC is not recommending a complete restatement of the law on insurance fraud generally. For example, LC does not seek to define fraud, instead, recommends the introduction of targeted provisions to confirm the remedies available to an insurer who discovers a fraud by a policyholder.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.34
• /
• pp.55-74
• /
• 2007

The documentary credit has been functioning as an indispensable tool for making international commercial transactions safer throughout the world since ICC adopted the second revision of the Uniform Customs and Practices for Commercial Documentary Credits in 1962. Letter of Credit transaction should be cleared by the principle of the trust and integrity and vile partners sometimes make a fraud on the L/C by the misinterpretation of the documents. As there is no rule but no exception, exception from application of these principles is allowed. The fraud exception nile constitutes contracting out an application of basic principles, this rule should apply restrictively and in many authorities a court does not apply this rule to nominated bank, confirming bank, and bona fide holder of draft even if fraud is involved in L/C transactions. If not, we lose a lot of benefits from the credit as valuable commercial device through reservation of these principles to take a few benefits. So, We need to recognize that the fraud exception rule should be applied restrictively. Therefore, this study reviewed condition of application and exception from application of fraud exception rule in view of Cardozo's opinion, the Sztejn court, and UCC Sections-114(2).

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.179-198
• /
• 2009

This paper aims at assessing reasonableness for restraining the independence principle in the operation of documentary credit in case of the illegality appeared in the underlying transactions. It has been a major rule under the independence principle to keep the credit operation free from the defences made by the issuing bank and/or credit applicant with a view to prevent the payment as specified under the credit. And also, it is generally accepted in the international commercial community to examine a presentation to determine, on the basis of the document alone, whether or not the documents appear on their face to constitute a complying presentation. Even though these two essences are major rules in the credit operation, if a presentation is made with the documents forged or materially fraudulent, the issuing bank can refuse to pay the documents in respect of fraud rule based on fraud exception for which a court of appropriate jurisdiction would enjoin such honour. Now we have newly come to another situation to determine whether or not we have to apply the same as fraud rule which is applicable to the illegality in the underlying contract under the new conception of illegality principle based on illegality exception. English Commercial Court handled the illegality case under the case of Mahonia Ltd., v. JP Morgan Chase Bank in 2003 and Justice Colman decided that issuing bank can rely on illegality affecting a letter of credit as an excuse for failure to pay. This judgement brought about the acceptance of illegality principle based on illegality exception as a defence to payment under a letter of credit as far as the illegality concerned in the underlying transactions. It is noticeable that this case will affect our international commercial community more to rely on the illegality in the underlying transactions as a good issue to stop payment for the issuing bank in the L/C operation.

• Proceedings of the Korea Inteligent Information System Society Conference
• /
• 2006.06a
• /
• pp.396-401
• /
• 2006

인터넷쇼핑몰의 신뢰도는 정확한 사업자신원정보로부터 출발한다. 우리나라의 경우, 인터넷쇼핑몰은 홈페이지에 사업자신원정보를 표시하도록 법으로 규정하고 있으며, 대부분의 인터넷쇼핑몰들이 규정을 잘 준수하고있다. 그러나 일부 인터넷쇼핑몰들이 고의로 사업자신원정보를 누락하거나 틀린 정보를 표시하기도 하며, 때로는 수시로 변하는 사업자신원정보를 일관성 있게 표시하지 않아 소비자들이 피해를 보거나 불편을 겪고있다. 또한 사업자의 신원을 정확히 밝히지 않는 악성 스팸 메일로 금융회사를 사칭하여 개인정보를 채가는 피싱(Phishing) 사기사건이 증가하고 있다. 이는 전자상거래에 대한 신뢰도를 저하시키는 큰 원안이 되고 있다. 이러한 문제를 해결하는 첫번째 노력이 온라인 사업자의 신원정보를 정확히 표시하고 소비자들이 진위여부를 파악 할 수 있도록 하는 것이다. 따라서 본 연구는 온라인 사업자의 신뢰도 제고를 위한 방안으로 사업자신원정보 표시에 대한 제 3자 인증서비스의 기본원칙을 제시하고 이에 따른 인증서비스 체계를 제시한다.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.89-105
• /
• 2019

This paper reviews and analyzes the U.S. cases and statutes on the issue of party autonomy in arbitration agreement. Arbitration agreement has been interpreted somewhat differently from general contracts because its legal characteristics are not purely contractual by nature. For example, some legal scholars insist that an arbitration contract is more about an agreement on a process of dispute resolution than a creation of rights and obligations to avoid litigation. Party autonomy was discussed in diverse legal perspectives including contract of adhesion, VKI principle, and separability of arbitration clause. These three legal perspectives are discussed to set the legal relationship between party autonomy and protection of consumers in consumer arbitration. In addition, it was discussed how legal defects in the formation of an arbitration contract can influence the party autonomy. The legal defects that were discussed to analyze the relationship between arbitration agreement and party autonomy included misrepresentation, fraud, mistake, duress, and undue influence.