• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.13 no.4
• /
• pp.51-79
• /
• 2011

Korea has accomplished the establishment of the National Single Window for Paperless Trade. Since 1991, it has developed Trade Automation Service System based on EDI technology. In 2003, Korean government and private sectors jointly began to set up National Paperless Trade Service( e-Trade Service) as one of the e-government projects. In 2008, they commenced the uTradeHub Service which was equipped with Internet based e-B/L and e-Nego service systems for the first time in the world To facilitate the service Korea amended its e-Trade facilitation Act and Law by 2007. At the end of 2011, Korea historically recorded its trade volume of 1 trillion US dollars and joined '$1 trillion trade club' as the 9the member country since the country had started international trade less than five decades ago. A rolling out of the e-B/L and e-Nego service will 'ally reduce the transaction costs of trading businesses and accelerate the activation e-trade services. The purposes of the study are to examine 'e-B/L Korea' service and its facilitation strategies as well as identify obstacles to utilize the 'e-B/L Korea' service. The paper reviewed and analyzed Korea's Paperless trade system and distinctive characteristics of the 'e-B/L Korea Service. Parts of the fOWld distinctive characteristics of the Korea's e-B/L service are as follows; It is well equiped with IT and legal system. It also has more that 30,000 potential users who are already uTradeHub service users. The paper indicated several weaknesses of the current system such as global KPI issues, circulation of the electronic documents not only in the domestic market but also among economies, development of the electronic Bill of Exchange. As resolution measures, the paper recommended the introduction of mutual recognition system of PKI among trade partner counties, setting up e-trade solution for small and medium companies, and special attention to raise users' awareness of the e-B/L service.

• 복합운송
• /
• s.129
• /
• pp.32-33
• /
• 2000

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2012.06a
• /
• pp.269-272
• /
• 2012

통상적인 항해용선계약에 따르면 체선료의 책임은 반대의 문언이 없는 한 용선자에게 있는 것으로 추정된다. 그러나 실무에서는 용선자의 책임이 제한되거나 송하인 또는 수하인 등에게 이전되어 선주가 체선료확보에 어려운 상황에 직면하게 되는 경우가 빈번하게 발생되고 있다. 본 연구에서는 용선자, 송하인, 수하인, 선하증권의 배서인, 기타 이해당사자간의 체선료지불 책임에 관한 문제를 영미법의 사례를 중심으로 살펴보고 결론과 시사점을 도출하여 선주나 운항업자의 실무에 도움이 되는 방안을 제시한다.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.53
• /
• pp.181-206
• /
• 2012

The straight bill of lading is regarded as the documents of title except in American law after The Rafaela S case. The Carewins case also decided that the exclusion clause of bill of lading did not exempt carriers from liability when the carriers delivered the cargo to the consignee without the production of original bill of lading. And the court said that the carrier was responsible for delivering the goods against a forged bill of lading regardless of exemption clause of bill of lading in the Motis case. It may be assumed through these cases that the straight bill of lading as a document of title gives documentary security to the banks in trade finance. However, there can be some downside to the efficacy of the straight bill of lading as collateral. First, when it is subject to the English law, the shipper can arbitrarily change the consignee different from the one named in the document. Second, some bills of lading bear provisions relating to the carrier delivering the goods upon reasonable proof of identity without the surrender of an original and/or genuine bill of lading.

• Journal of Korea Port Economic Association
• /
• v.22 no.4
• /
• pp.1-17
• /
• 2006

In the Bill of Lading of The Irbenskiy Proliv is not subject to the Hague-Visby Rules in accordance with paragraphs (A) and/or (E) of cl.1 or to the Hague Rules in accordance with paragraphs (B) and/or (D) of cl.1. The Irbenskiy Proliv is very rare case that is effective to exempt the carrier as literal words of Bill of Lading. The action concerns cargoes of perishable goods shipped from Brazil to Japan, under Bills of Lading each of which contained an extensive carrier's exemption clause. A preliminary issue was ordered to be determined on the question whether c1.4 is effective to exempt the ralliers from any potential liability for the claims in this case. The court held that there is no reason to reject c1.4 as part of each of the contracts contained in or evidenced by the bills of lading; and it protects the carrier where damage to the goods shipped results from such causes. It is therefore effective to exempt the carriers from any potential liability for those claims.

• 한국무역상무학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 2002.12a
• /
• pp.9-72
• /
• 2002

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.149-181
• /
• 1998

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.5
• /
• pp.73-95
• /
• 1993

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.297-325
• /
• 1999

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.11
• /
• pp.205-223
• /
• 1998