• 복합운송
• /
• 통권130호
• /
• pp.26-27
• /
• 2001

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.177-197
• /
• 2013

ICC 은행위원회는 2007년 7월 1일 UCP600의 개정과 함께 ISBP도 이와 함께 적용될 수 있도록 업데이트된 ISBP 681을 마련하였다. 그 후 약 6년이 지난 현재 각국 위원회의 의견을 수렴하여 2013년 ISBP745로 내용이 개정되었다. 신용장거래에서 서류심사를 위한 국제표준은행관행인 ISBP 745는 각 항목별로 구분하여 A~Q로 항목을 구분하고 있으며 UCP 600과 용어의 일치나 내용을 맞추기 위한 노력을 하였다. 이러한 노력에도 불구하고 ISBP 745가 이번 개정에서도 일부 모호한 내용을 포함하고 있다. 대표적으로 환어음 만기일 계산과 관련하여 일부 모호한 내용을 포함하고 있으며 그 이외의 사항에 대하여도 검토가 필요하다고 할 수 있다. 일반적으로 ISBP는 UCP 600과 ICC 은행위원회의 의견 및 결정(decisions) 내용과 일치된다고 할 수 있으며 따라서 거래당사자 모두 UCP 600에 준거한 신용장거래는 UCP 600 뿐만 아니라 ISBP 745를 명확하게 이해하여 신용장거래에서 서류의 불일치로 인하여 대금지급이 거절되는 것을 사전에 예방하기 위한 노력을 하여야 할 것이다.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제42권5호
• /
• pp.213-232
• /
• 2017

본 연구는 현재 시행되고 있는 BPO에 대해 제도적 차원에서 주요 쟁점으로 중심으로 신용장 제도와 비교하여 고찰하였다. BPO는 은행간의 약정이기 때문에 지급의무의 이행, 확인, 양도 등에 있어서 신용장제도와 차이를 보이며, 또한 유의해야 할 점이다. BPO은 기본적으로 기능 면에서 신용장과 유사하지만, 별개의 독립적인 제도로 운용되며 정보기술과 데이터를 기반으로 한다. 신용장을 포함한 전통적인 제도 보다는 더 효율적이며 비용 효과적이다. 따라서 전통적인 제도에 대한 전자적 대안으로 보여진다. 본 연구는 선행 연구를 중심으로 이미 발표된 BPO 관련 연구와 자료 등을 통하여 문헌 연구하였다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제76권
• /
• pp.103-123
• /
• 2017

If additional condition in letter of credit is used in malicious way, it affects the international trade transaction in jeopardy. Therefore, it's significant to identify whether additional conditions are malicious or ordinary in the transaction with letter of credit. In normal cases, thanks to lots of useful features as an international payment method, such as security of payment, legal protection, and versatility, a letter of credit is widely used in international trade. However, even with these advantageous features, a letter of credit is complicate and costly to use, compared to other payment methods. Furthermore, due to its principle of independence from underlying contract, a use of letter of credit creates another type of concern for proper handling and needs significant caution upon field use. At some points, malicious additional conditions are used for buyer's advantage in deal making and fraud instance in worst situation. In addition, some countries request malicious conditions against sellers as a non-tariff barrier. Therefore it's extremely important to recognize whether malicious additional condition exists in letter of credit and, if so, how to deal with it. This study delivers the information to distinguish and categorize the malicious conditions in various cases and to figure out how to deal with them for safer trade with less risk.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제50권
• /
• pp.89-108
• /
• 2011

This work intends to study some issues in relation to the cancellation and amendment of letter of credit. Those issues in relation to the cancellation are the significance and formation time of cancellation of letter of credit and some points for practical attention of UCP 600 in the case of cancellation of letter of credit. Those issues in relation to the amendment are the significance and formation requirements of amendment of letter of credit and some points for practical attention of UCP 600 in the case of amendment of letter of credit. If exporters receive letters of credit from foreign countries, they must confirm the indication of irrevocable letter of credit. When they find revocable letters of credit, they should amend the credits to be irrevocable credits. If issuing banks amend letters of credit against beneficiaries, the banks should receive the beneficiaries' consent. If amendments devalue applicants' expectations in the underlying transaction, the applicants for whom the credit issues are not liable to reimburse. Beneficiaries and issuing banks may amend a credit, but the issuing bank acts at its own peril if it does not obtain the applicant's consent.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제46권
• /
• pp.159-177
• /
• 2010

This work intends to study some problems in relation to the issuance of letters of credit. Those problems are the delay of issuing letters of credit, the reissuing letters of credit, and the issuing letters of credit in the third party's name. Sellers and buyers must keep in mind that the supply of letter of credit by buyer is the condition precedent for a seller's shipment obligation. A seller has no obligation to ship the goods until he receives the letter of credit by buyer's bank, issuing bank. An issuing bank can have the risk that an original letter of credit and a reissued letter of credit can be used double in the exporting country. The most safe method for issuing bank is to cancel the original letter of credit and to reissue a new letter of credit. When an issuing bank issues a letter of credit in the third party's name, the bank should investigate the background of the transaction and give the buyer a proper line of credit.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제16권2호
• /
• pp.213-238
• /
• 2006

Deferred payment letter of credit is the L/C that makes the issuing bank to pay a beneficiary at maturity stipulated in the credit. In this deferred payment letter of credit transaction, is it possible that a confirming or nominating bank payor negotiate before maturity? and the confirming or nominating bank have legal protection when paid or negotiated before maturity? These problems are raised in argument. By the way, Korea, Switzerland, Germany, and Italy are positive on the above question, but France, United Kingdom, and Singapore are negative. Therefore, when using deferred payment letter of credit, it is required to keep in mind that the understanding of maturity stipulated in the credit is different among countries, legal principles of each nations, and researchers. And other problems are raised also as follows; the application of Fraud Rule and principle of independence and abstraction as nature of credit, when to pay credit amount to beneficiary, and refusal of payment due to poor quality. Finally, it is required to use deferred payment letter of credit, after full understanding of deferred payment letter of credit pointed out in this paper.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제21권2호
• /
• 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.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제45권
• /
• pp.85-109
• /
• 2010

L/C provides the exporter and the importer with safe assurance in the exchange of goods for payment in international trade. It involves a number of parties. Although the parties may have confidence in their client, bad faith or ignorance of international banking practice by any of these parties could cause the failure of transaction, which makes international trade a risky business. Most of the risks are found in transport document, which can cause disputes. There are many factors in the risk of transport documents under L/C transaction. One most common risk factor for the beneficiary in all transport documents is even if there is no discrepancy in document, the issuing bank or the applicant refuses to pay or delay payment insisting there is a discrepancy. In some very rare cases, the beneficiary may not get paid due to unfair injunction of the local court of the applicant. For the applicant, most common risk factors are fake bill and fraud. Risks classified according to the sorts of transport documents are as follows. 1. In B/L, payment can be refused because it is regarded as charter party B/L, although there is no real charter party contract. And the applicant can bear the potential risk of the loss or deterioration of cargo through transhipment of the cargo loaded on board in container if transhipment is prohibited without excluding of UCP 600 article 20 (c). 2. In charter party B/L, the applicant may take delivery without paying when charter party B/L is signed by charterer, which can result in a big loss for the beneficiary and the negotiating bank. And risks may arise when cargo is seized because the charterer does not pay the hire. The applicant and the issuing bank are also vulnerable to a risk - Against whom should they file a suit when cargo gets damaged during transportation? 3. In multimodal transport document, which is subject to a conflict because there is a big difference in viewpoints between transport industry and banks, conflicts may also arise when L/C requires ocean B/L and accepts multimodal transport document at the same time, but does not specify the details. 4. In air waybill, where the consignee is not the issuing bank but the applicant, risks may take place to the beneficiary when the applicant takes delivery but refuses to pay asserting minor discrepancies in document. The applicant may also bear the risk when cargo may not be loaded because air waybill is a received bill. Another risk may arise when although the applicant prohibits transhipment without excluding UCP 600 article 23 (c), the cargo may be transhipped, provided that the entire carriage is covered by one and the same air waybill.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제15권4호
• /
• pp.241-265
• /
• 2013

은행은 오직 서류만을 기초로, 서류가 문면상 일치하는 제시인지 여부를 심사하여야 하며, 물품이나 기초거래 또는 기타 거래관련 사항들을 심사할 필요는 없다. 은행은 제시서류의 형식 충분성 정확성 진정성 위조 여부 또는 법적효력에 대하여 어떠한 의무나 책임도 지지 아니한다. 본 논문의 연구 목적은 신용장거래에서 은행의 서류 심사에 관하여 고찰하는바, 특히 국제상업회의소(ICC)가 제정한 신용장통일규칙(Uniform Customs and Practices for Documentary Credit, 2007 Revision, ICC Publication No.600)과 국제표준은행관행(International Standard Banking Practice, ISBP Publication No.745), Banking Committee의 견해 및 영국의 판례를 중심으로 연구를 진행하였다. 그동안 신용장에 대하여는 그 중요성만큼이나 다양한 분야에서 연구가 진행되어 왔으며, 특히 은행의 서류심사 기준과 요건, 서류심사표준과 불일치서류 제시에 따른 효과, 사기의 문제 및 수익자의 일치하는 제시에 따른 개설은행의 의무 등 다수의 논문이 발표되었다. 선행연구와의 차별성에 관하여, 본 논문은 은행의 서류심사 시 고려사항과 서류불일치에 따른 은행의 조치를 중심으로 UCP600 규정(UCP500과의 비교)의 해석은 물론 2013년 발행된 ISBP745와 다수의 외국판례를 분석 고찰함으로써 실무당사자들에게 필요한 사전지식과 정보를 제공하는데 의의를 두었다.