• 무역학회지
• /
• 제42권6호
• /
• pp.1-25
• /
• 2017

본 연구는 하자물품에 대한 매도인의 책임에 관한 CISG와 CESL상 매도인의 계약에 적합한 물품인도의무에 관한 비교연구라는 연구목적 하에 다음과 같은 주요 연구내용을 담고 있다. 첫째, CISG 및 CESL상 하자담보책임 관련 규정중 매도인의 계약에 적합한 물품인도의무의 내용을 구체적 내용의 검토와 더불어 그간 논의의 전개과정을 살펴본다. 둘째, 각 규범의 관련 규정과 상호 비교하여 살펴봄으로 근대입법의 흐름을 진단하여 무역업계의 하자담보책임 관련 이해의 차이를 좁히고 실무적 대응방안의 기초를 마련한다. 셋째, 비교연구를 통하여 상호 차이점에 대한 해석론적 내지 개정 의견을 제시하도록 한다. 이러한 비교연구의 시도는 특히 거래당사자로서 상인과 소비자의 각자 이익의 관점에서 그들의 계약상 합리적 기대를 올바로 반영하고 있는지를 평가하고자 한다.

• 유통과학연구
• /
• 제21권9호
• /
• pp.115-121
• /
• 2023

Purpose: This study aimed to deal with disputes between the seller and the buyer in connection with the Letter of Credit (LC) in a sales contract. The Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) provides the rules on the fundamental breaches which can lead to termination of the sales contract but the CISG is not enough to govern issues arising from the LC disputes when the sales contract is not clear about the payment terms. This paper tried to find some solutions to the disputes by considering international rules, such as the Principles of European Contract Law (PECL). Research design, data and methodology: The methodology applied in this study was an analysis of some court decisions and extended literature review. Results: The study revealed that in contracts for the sale of international goods, the buyer was obliged to open an LC as manner of payment. If the buyer failed to open an LC or amend the terms of the LC, the seller could avoid the contract because this could deprive the seller's expected interest. Conclusions: Few studies in Korea have been comprehensively analyzed in terms of the obligations of regarding the LC with respect to the CISG in court cases. This study suggests safeguarding the buyer and seller when the LC is considered absolute or conditional.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제19권1호
• /
• pp.147-169
• /
• 2009

This paper deals with disputes incurred from the CISG provisions in relation with the conformity of goods with a view to finding the general way of approach made by the court and arbitration tribunal in the case laws for the interpretation of CISG based on 6(six) cases thereon. Throughout this study, it has been noted that the German Supreme Court devoted most in creating the general principle of CISG interpretation in relation with national compulsory law of regulation applicable on the conformity of goods. It was New Zealand mussels case in which the German supreme court decided that the exporting country's compulsory law of regulation would be applied in determining the conformity of goods. Furthermore, German supreme court added that CISG does not place an obligation on the exporter to supply goods, which conform to all statutory or other public provisions in force in the import state unless the same provisions exist in the export State as well, or the importer informed the exporter about such provisions existing in the import state, or the exporter had knowledge of the provisions due to special circumstances. It is stipulated in CISG that the goods conform with contract if they are fit for the purpose for which goods of the same description would ordinarily be used. When questions arise concerning matters governed by the CISG that are not expressly defined in the CISG, the question is to be settled in conformity with general principles on which the convention is based. Only when such a general principle cannot be found may the tribunal turn to other sources such as UNIDROIT Principles, Principles of European Contract Law and Lex Mercatoria, etc. Interpretation of CISG should be autonomous, in the sense that it should not depend on principles and concepts derived from any national legal system. Even where a CISG rule is directly inspired by domestic law, the court should not fall back on its domestic law, but interpret the rule by reference to the CISG with a view to its international character and to the need to promote uniformity in its application and the observance of good faith in international trade.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제12권2호
• /
• pp.153-184
• /
• 2003

‘Schiedsgutachten’ is more of a law phenomenon that appears frequently in privity of contract rather than a concept that is .generally established in the positive law. There is no definition of this in the positive law which makes it difficult to put a finger on the concept but when the concerned party of the conflict puts the establishment of a fact that is a premise to the legal relationship or the right about the legal right's content or the supplementation of the legal relationship to a third party and makes an agreement to follow the third party's judgement, the process is called the contract of schiedsgutachten. At this point, the judgement of the third party is called the schiedsgutachten. This thesis strives to search for an activation of the schiedsgutachten system in Korea by analyzing and researching the systems in various European countries including Germany where the above mentioned schiedsgutachten system is relatively well-developed. First of all, the three types of schiedsgutachten in the German law will be looked into. Based on this, the theories and judicial precedents of Swiss law, French law, Italian law, and British law will be looked into as well. By doing this, similarities and distinction standards between the various countries' legal systems will be further analyzed. Along with this, the legal qualities and the binding power of the schiedsgutachten will be searched out. In Korea, the term schiedsgutachten itself is not customary as the system itself is not actively being carried out. However, in car damage compensation lawsuits which occupy a big percentage, if the schiedsgutachten system were to be used, the problem would be easily solved without progressing to lawsuits. Korea should actively seek out this system with the various models of different countries including Germany which has been introduced in this thesis as a model.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제31권3호
• /
• pp.3-23
• /
• 2021

England is a significant base for international trade in Europe, and dispute resolution through arbitration is active. Therefore, due to the geographical relationship with the European continent, the settlement of trade transactions and disputes with European countries is one of the most essential tasks. In this regard, arbitration procedures in England have been actively used for a long time. In England, dispute resolution methods through arbitration have been developed centered on merchant groups such as guilds from the 16th century and have been actively used until today. However, the arbitration procedure also had the characteristics of the common law because there was no legislation related to arbitration. Therefore, arbitration based on common law was carried out until the first half of the 19th century. In the 'Arbitration Act 1889', two types of arbitration systems, 'common law arbitration' and 'statutory arbitration' coexisted. However, in the arbitration procedure, according to the newly enacted 'Arbitration Act 1889', the arbitration agreement was binding from the time the arbitration agreement was reached. There was a way to select an arbitrator even if it was not explicitly stipulated in the arbitration agreement, and the arbitration award was quickly enforced. Arbitration under contract was preferred over common law arbitration, where withdrawal and revocation of awards were possible. However, in response to these provisions, the England courts considered the arbitration system to deprive the courts of jurisdiction, while a strengthened judicial review of arbitration procedures was done. In particular, England unified the arbitration-related laws, which had been scattered for a long time, adopted the model law, and enacted the 'Arbitration Act 1996'. Under the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards in 'Arbitration Act 1996', Section 66 deals with the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards and foreign arbitral awards. Section 2 of the 'Arbitration Act 1950' is inherited and used as it is. Second, it deals with the execution of arbitral awards under the New York Convention: Article 100 (New York Convention), Section 101 (Approval and Enforcement of Awards), Section 102 (Evidence Presented by a Party Seeking Recognition and Enforcement), and Section 103 (Provides Matters Concerning Rejection Recognition and Enforcement).

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제45권1호
• /
• pp.83-100
• /
• 2020

This study aimed to provide the most accurate analysis possible regarding the buyer's duty to examine goods and give notice, or the like, of non-conformity to the seller under Belgian law in comparison with the CISG and CESL. Even though Belgium is the capital of the Europe Union, most of its laws remain untranslated in English. Therefore, this study may offer key insights into the specificities of Belgian law, which while being derived from the French Napoleon Code has its own practices coded into its Case Law. It also makes a comparison with the new CESL and CISG in order to evaluate their respective influence on national law and other infructuous attempts to harmonize Belgian law for the internal European market. Evaluating the differences of each system in the spirit of comparative law may be a good basis for the development of laws in each jurisdiction.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권4호
• /
• pp.3-27
• /
• 2013

Overriding Mandatory rules are laws that purport to apply irrespective of the law chosen by the parties to govern their contractual relations. This article examines their role and applicability in international arbitration. The overriding mandatory rules pose a complex and continuing problem for arbitrators because they put the interests of states and parties in direct competition. When a law says that arbitrators must apply it, yet the parties' contract excludes it, what should the arbitrators do? Where should their allegiance lie? The answer depends on the underlying nature of arbitration - and since that can be legitimately conceptualized in different ways, a principled approach to overriding mandatory rules seems to be impossible to provide. Nevertheless, a practical solution is required, because there were European cases in which courts voided valid arbitration agreements made, reasoning that arbitrators certainly would not apply and/or take into account its overriding mandatory rules of indemnity right granted to commercial agent and distributor in Europe. Therefore, this paper first examines status of overriding mandatory rules of another law in international litigation and then explores any possibility of application of overriding mandatory rules of another law in international commercial arbitration. With this analysis, the author reaches into a conclusion that the arbitrator should and/or take into account overriding mandatory rules of another law, yet should limit to them of the country where characteristic performance is made under the contract.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제35권2호
• /
• pp.137-168
• /
• 2020

여객이 1999년 몬트리올 협약 제17조상 사고로 인정되는 범위 내에서 사상을 당하였을 때 항공운송인은 위 협약을 근거로 손해배상을 받을 수 있다. 항공기에 탑승한 승무원이 같은 사고로 인하여 사상을 당한 경우 몬트리올협약을 배타적으로 적용받는 여객과는 달리 항공사와 체결한 근로 계약상 준거법인 노동법에 의하여 보상받게 된다. 승무원이 근로제공을 위하여 항공기에 탑승하는 것은 근로계약을 근거로 한 것이지 항공여객운송계약을 근거로 하는 것이 아니다. 그러므로 사고로 인하여 항공기에 탑승한 승무원이 사상을 당한 경우, 사용자인 항공사에 대하여 근로계약에 기한 채무불이행 책임을 묻는 경우에는 노동법이, 근로자 또는 유족이 사용자를 상대로 불법행위에 기한 손해배상을 청구하는 경우에는 민법이 적용된다. 이와 관련하여 중국항공사에 근무하는 중국승무원이 대한민국에서 사고를 당하여 사망한 경우 유족이 중국 항공사를 상대로 손해배상을 청구하는 사건에서 불법행위지인 대한민국에서 국제재판관할이 있는지 여부, 이때의 준거법은 법정지법인 대한민국법이 되는지 근로계약의 준거법인 중국법이 적용되는지 대법원 2010. 7. 15. 선고 2010다18355 판결을 통하여 살펴보았다. 또한 서울지방법원 1995.5.18. 선고 94가단14412판결은 비행근무 중 상해를 입은 승무원이 근로기준법상 재해보상, 산업재해보상보험법상 보험급여에 만족하지 않고, 사고에 관하여 책임이 있는 사용자나 제3자를 상대로 불법행위나 채무불이행을 원인으로 한 민사상 손해배상을 청구할 수 있다는 것을 보여준다. 출근 중 기존의 질병으로 인하여 사망한 사건에서는 근로복지공단에서 망인의 사망을 업무상 재해로 인정하지 아니하여 망인의 부모가 유족급여 및 장의비 부지급 처분을 취소하는 소송에서 1심(서울행정법원 2017.8.31. 선고 2016구합 81642 판결)에서는 업무상 재해로 인정되었지만, 항소심(서울고등법원 2018.7.19. 선고 2017누74186 판결)에서 패소하여 고인의 질병 및 업무량에 관한 분석을 통하여 항소심의 판결을 비판하였다. 승무원의 근무 형태는 타 직종과는 다르게 항공기에 탑승하여 이루어지는 것이므로 다른 근무지로 이동하거나 비행근무 종료 후 모기지 또는 체류지로 돌아오기 위하여 비행임무는 수행하지 않으나 비행근무시간의 50%만 인정받는 형태로 항공기에 탑승하는 경우도 발생한다. 여객과 동일하게 간주할 수는 없지만 비행임무를 하지 않는 승무원이 사고로 사상을 당한 경우 근로계약에 기인한 손해배상 청구를 할 것인지 국제항공운송에서 사고발생시 여객에게 적용되는 몬트리올협약이 배타적으로 적용될 지에 관한 논의와 함께 그와 관련된 판례인 In re Mexico City Aircrash of October 31, 1979, 708 F.2d 400 (9th Cir. 1983), Demanes v. United Airlines, 348 F.Supp. 13 (C.D.Cal. 1972), Sulewski v. Federal Express Corp., 749 F.Supp. 506 (S.D.N.Y. 1990)을 검토해 보고 유럽사법재판소(CJEU)에서 Wucher Helicopter GmbH and Euro-Aviation Versicherungs AG v. Fridolin Santer를 통하여 정의한 '여객'의 개념을 명확하게 이해해 보도록 한다.

• 한국재난정보학회 논문집
• /
• 제7권2호
• /
• pp.123-129
• /
• 2011

민간 조사업의 주체는 공익성의 확보라는 면에서 법인으로 해야 할 것이며 사업주에게는 허가제로 시행해야 한다. 민간조사업의 감독기관은 유럽, 일본 등 다수의 국가들이 경찰기관이 감독기관인 점과 경비업의 감독기관이 경찰청에서 수행하듯이 민간조사업도 감독기관은 경찰이 되어야 한다. 민간조사업이 개인의 정보를 취급하는 경우가 많으므로 별칙에 있어 개인정보의 관리를 명확히 하여 고객의 기본권 침해를 방지해야 한다. 또한 계약 시, 계약 후, 계약변경 하는 경우에 고객에게 해당내용을 서면으로 즉시 교부하는 등에 대한 고객의 의무사항을 강화해야 한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.261-301
• /
• 2016

Recently the abusive calls on on-demand bonds have been a critical issue among many engineering and construction companies in Korea. On-demand bond is referred to as an independent guarantee in the sense that the guarantee is independent from its underlying contract although it was issued based on such underlying contract. For this reason, the issuing bank is not required to and/or entitled to look into whether there really is a breach of underlying contract in relation to the call on demand-bonds. Due to this kind of principle of independence, the applicant has to run the risk of the on demand bond being called by the beneficiary without due grounds. Only where the call proves to be fraudulent or abusive in a very clear way, the issuing bank would not be obligated to pay the bond proceeds for the call on on-demand bonds. In order to prevent the issuing bank from paying the proceeds under the on-demand bond, the applicant usually files with its competent court an application for injunction prohibiting the beneficiary from calling against the issuing bank. However, it is in practice difficult for the applicant to prove the beneficiary's call on the bond to be fraudulent since the courts in almost all the jurisdictions of advanced countries require very strict and objective evidences such as the documents which were signed by the owner (beneficiary) or any other third party like the engineer. There is another way of preventing the beneficiary from calling on the bond, which is often utilized especially in the United Kingdom or Western European countries such as Germany. Based upon the underlying contract, the contractor which is at the same time the applicant of on-demand bond requests the court to order the owner (the beneficiary) not to call on the bond. In this case, there apparently seems to be no reason why the court should apply the strict fraud rule to determine whether to grant an injunction in that the underlying legal relationship was created based on a construction contract rather than a bond. However, in most jurisdictions except for United Kingdom and Singapore, the court also applies the strict fraud rule on the ground that the parties promised to make the on-demand bond issued under the construction contract. This kind of injunction is highly unlikely to be utilized on the international level because it is very difficult in normal situations to establish the international jurisdiction towards the beneficiary which will be usually located outside the jurisdiction of the relevant court. This kind of injunction ordering the owner not to call on the bond can be rendered by the arbitrator as well even though the arbitrator has no coercive power for the owner to follow it. Normally there would be no arbitral tribunal existing at the time of the bond being called. In this case, the emergency arbitrator which most of the international arbitration rules such as ICC, LCIA and SIAC, etc. adopt can be utilized. Finally, the contractor can block the issuing bank from paying the bond proceeds by way of a provisional attachment in case where it also has rights to claim some unpaid interim payments or damages. This is the preservative measure under civil law system, which the lawyers from common law system are not familiar with. As explained in this article, it is very difficult to block the issuing bank from paying in response to the bond call by the beneficiary even if the call has no valid ground under the underlying construction contract. Therefore, it is necessary for the applicants who are normally engineering and construction companies to be prudent to make on-demand bonds issued. They need to take into account the creditability of the project owner as well as trustworthiness of the judiciary system of the country where the owner is domiciled.