• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제14권4호
• /
• pp.433-456
• /
• 2012

확인은행은 수익자가 신용장조건과 일치하는 제시를 하면 수익자에게 대금지급을 확약한다. 그러나 신용장 사기가 명백한 경우 확인은행은 개설은행과 마찬가지로 대금을 지급할 의무를 지지 않는다. 즉 확인은행이 서류 위조에 대한 위험까지 부담하는 것은 아니다. 확인은행이 발견하지 못한 하자를 개설은행이 발견한 경우 확인은행이 수익자 또는 지정은행에 소구권을 행사할 수 없다. 왜냐하면 UCP600에서 서류 접수 후 5은행영업일이 경과하면 개설은행 또는 확인은행은 서류 하자를 이유로 대금지급을 거절할 수 없기 때문이다. 확인은행이 수익자의 하자 있는 서류의 용인을 개설은행에 요구하여, 개설은행이 이것을 용인하였다 하더라도 확인은행은 확인에 따른 책임을 지지 않는다. 기한부 매입신용장에서 확인은행이 지정은행인 경우 수익자가 신용장조건과 일치하는 서류를 제시하면 확인은행은 즉시 신용장 대금을 지급하여야 한다. 따라서 확인은행이 즉시 대금을 지급할 의사가 없다면 기한부신용장에서 연지급 또는 인수신용장을 이용하여야 한다. 수익자 입장에서 신용장 확인을 받더라도 서류 일치성 여부에 대한 분쟁이 발생할 수 있으므로 대금회수가 100% 보장되는 것은 아니다. 신용장 확인보다는 상환은행의 상환확약이 더 안전하다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제76권
• /
• pp.77-101
• /
• 2017

This article provides the definitions of the negotiation of credit, the negotiating bank and the negotiation credit. It further describes a number of legal status of negotiating banks by looking into the legal relations firstly between the beneficiary and the negotiating bank and secondly between the issuing bank and the negotiating bank. This study is in large part based on relevant provisions of UCP 600 and decisions of the Supreme court of South Korea. Under UCP 600 the definition of negotiation requires the purchase by the nominated negotiating bank of the required documents by advancing funds on or before the banking day on which reimbursement is due to the negotiating bank. A negotiation credit authorizes the negotiating bank who is a nominated bank to purchase from the beneficiary the documents required by the letter of credit and to present those documents to the issuing bank for reimbursement. If the credit is to be honoured at sight, reimbursement is due when the issuing bank determines that there has been a conforming presentation. Reimbursement under a letter of credit available by acceptance or by deferred payment is due at maturity of the credit. In particular, while the timing of advance by the nominated negotiating bank is up to the parties, a promise of the negotiating bank to advance the purchase price to a fraudulent beneficiary does not confer immunity from letter-of-credit fraud prior to its performance. This requires the negotiating bank who is notified of material fraud prior to making an advance to beneficiary to avoid a loss by using the fraud.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제50권
• /
• pp.215-250
• /
• 2011

Korean won overseas construction projects worth 71.6 billion US Dollars in 2010, which exceeded that of 2009 by 45.6%. An overseas construction project is a transaction of large scale, long term project, many parties participating, deferred payment, and of high-technology. It contributes to foreign currency earning, and also leads the nation's export restructuring work towards high value-added one. There are various kinds of risks towards the relevant parties respectively, which are key elements in successfully performing the overseas construction project. There are completion risk, financing risk, operating risk, revenue risk etc, in an employer's place. A contractor may be confronted with payment risk, issuance risk of performance bond, financing risk, performance risk of sub-contractors, and exchange rate risk. In lenders place there are repayment risk, completion risk, and political risk in the host country. In order to mitigate risks, the parties shall take relevant measures or require relevant securities. A contractor needs to evaluate the credibility of an employer in respect of payment risk, and can also request export insurance cover by the Korea Trade Insurance Corporation(the former 'Korea Export Insurance Corporation"). An employer can require a contractor to provide performance bond in respect of completion risk, and employ a well-known first class bank as a mandated arranger to arrange financing with regard to completion risk. Lenders needs to evaluate the credibility of an employer and accomplish feasibility study of the project. Lenders can request insurance cover from export credit agency. Once the parties assess the respective risks and obtain relevant securities, the project will be successfully completed. The success of the project will be sure to bring the parties involved enormous profits and another opportunity to participate in overseas construction project afterwards.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제33권
• /
• pp.63-89
• /
• 2007

The UCP is an authoritative compilation of the customs and practice of letters of credit observed by most of the participants in the transaction. It remains the most successful set of private rules for trade ever developed. First issued in 1933, the UCP has been through five revisions, the latest being the present UCP 500, which came into force in 1994. Since 1994, new developments in transport, insurance, electronic commerce and banking industry have spurred the current revision of the rules. The ICC Banking Commission approved UCP 600 on October 25, 2006 by a unanimous vote of 91 to 0. The revision, which will come into effect on July 1, 2007, incorporates a number of changes from UCP 500 as follows : UCP 600 has a leaner set of rules, with 39 articles rather than 49 articles of UCP 500; New sections on "definitions" and "interpretations" have been added to clarify the meaning of ambiguous terms; The phrase "reasonable time" for acceptance or refusal of documents has been replaced by a firm period of five banking days; UCP 600 allows for the discounting of deferred payment credits. However, UCP 600 has two main problems such as the inconsistency with insurance industry and the banking community-oriented rules. We have some months before the commencement of UCP 600. From today to the commencement of UCP 600, we should study the full contents of UCP 600 and the influences on the trade industry.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제12권
• /
• pp.519-551
• /
• 1999

When an issuing bank issues a documentary credit, it must decide if the reimbursement will be a direct or simple or a bank-to-bank reimbursement. This decision is based on the bank that is nominated to pay, incur a deferred payment undertaking, accept drafts or negotiate. If an issuing bank decided bank-to-bank reimbursement, it must include the information in the credit instructing the nominated bank on how to obtain reimbursement. This instruction includes the name of the reimbursing bank, an indication that the reimbursement is subject to the Uniform Rules for Bank-to-Bank Reimbursements Under Documentary Credits ('URR'), ICC Publication 525 and any additional information that affects the nominated bank's ability to receive reimbursement. Until recently, reimbursements were the subject of outline regulation by Article 19 of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits ('UCP') and national law. Now, however, the International Chamber of Commerce has drafted URR, designed to emulate the harmonization of rules governing documentary credits achieved by the UCP. The URR are complementary to the UCP, which they are not intended to override or change. They became effective on July 1, 1996. The purpose of this study is to promote understanding on the Uniform Rules for Bank-to-Bank Reimbursements under Documentary Credits. In this paper, I studied the following subjects:(1) Bank-to-Bank Reimbursements tranaction under Documentary Credits, (2) Meaning of the URR's promulgation, (3) Analysis on the URR's Article. (1) General provisions and definitions, (2) Liabilities and responsibilities, (3) Form and notification of authorisations, amendments and claims, (4) Miscellaneous provisions.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.381-399
• /
• 2007

UCP 600 will now come into effect on 1 July 2007, giving practitioners more than six months to prepare for the change. The vote on the UCP was also a favourable vote on eUCP Version 1.1 which was amended to bring it into conformity with the new rules. ICC Banking commission unanimeusly approved the revised UCP 600 on 26 October 2006 in paris convention. The most important revision of UCP600 have altered the technical and difficult to understand wording of UCP500 into plain simple precise and concise language, The singuler achievement of UCP600 is its elimination of phrase like "reasonable care" "reasonable time" and "an it's face" from the rule. The introduction of separate articles 2 and 3 on "Definitions" and "Interpretation" which contain the concept of "honour" along with the inclusion of certain ISBP wording in UCP, should bring about far greater clarity and precision than in many of the contentions articles in UCP500. The definition of negotiation should help lay to rest the controversies surrounding the terms of negotiation. The removal of reasonable time and the replacement by five banking days should speed the process and make L/Cs more attractive in the market, nevertheless UCP600 have many problems in appling it in practical field. For example the definition of credit, negotiation and purchase it's accepted or undertaken payment draft by accepting bank or deferred payment bank, the second advising bark's position etc. so, I will introduce in this thesis the important revised articles of UCP600 and investigate the problems in applying it in practicle field with reference to the specialist's opinion of the practical field and ICC opinions of drafting Group.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제22권1호
• /
• pp.65-88
• /
• 2012

Even though there are some discrepancies in detail with the legal characteristic of the issuing bank's notice to the beneficiary of opening of the letter of credit, article 25 of "the Korean Private International Act(hereunder, 'KPIA')" can be applied to the legal relation between the issuing bank and the beneficiary or the negotiating bank. According to article 26 of the KPIA, if there is no agreement between the issuing bank and its opponent party as to the governing law issues, a state's law which has the closest relationship with the subject case may be applied. In the latter case, given the facts that the issuing bank plays important roles in every phasis of the sale of goods by the letter of credit, a law of place where the issuing bank's business premises is situated(the $lex$ $situs$) can be the applicable law. Meanwhile, "the Korean Supreme Court(hereunder 'KSC')" held that the beneficiary or the negotiating bank can claim any damages arising due to the refusal or deferred payment of the issuing bank, and the law which governs the above mentioned situation is the same law that is applicable to the legal relation between the issuing bank and the beneficiary or the negotiating bank. The main reason of the KSC's ruling is that the nature of the legitimate interest rate which is stated in article 3 of "the Act on Special Cases concerning Expedition etc. of Legal Proceeding(hereunder 'ASCELP')" is substantial matters, not procedural. Taking into account, however, that the main object of ASCELP lies in expedition of legal proceeding, prompt realization of people's rights and duties, and prevention of delayed legal proceeding, it is recommendable that ASCELP, instead of the law applicable to the legal relation between the issuing bank and the beneficiary or the negotiating bank, should be applied to the cases in which the malicious debtor's only and main purpose is delaying the legal proceedings. On the other hand, even if the issuing bank's duty of examination of the documents which were tendered by the beneficiary or the negotiating bank is restricted to the formality and strict conformity of the documents and not the substantiality of the documents, the issuing bank still has to examine the documents with due diligence that is required to the banks whose main business is sales of documents, not the real goods. In this regard, under the circumstances where the document lacked the regularity and/or the formality on its face because of the forgery of the document and where it was expected that an ordinary banker might have easily found any faults with the document, the issuing bank must compensate any parties for damages when it pays money without due diligence as a banker who engaged in the sales of documents.