• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제58권
• /
• pp.179-213
• /
• 2013

While a performance type guarantee is required as a security for non-performance risk by a seller, a payment guarantee is used as a security for non-payment risk by a buyer(or a borrower in a loan agreement). A payment guarantee is a type of independent bank guarantee, bank guarantee, bond, demand guarantee, or standby letter of credit. A guarantor accepts a credit risk of a principal which is normally a buyer in a contract for sale of goods. A payment guarantee is independent of the underlying relationship between the applicant and the beneficiary. The guarantor is only empowered to examine the beneficiary's demand and determine the payment on its face to the terms of the guarantee. A payment guarantee is thus different from a suretyship. The principle of independence carries a significant advantages for a guarantor as well as for a beneficiary. While a documentary credit requires B/L, commercial invoice, packing list, inspection certificate, etc., a typical payment guarantee does not require any evidence for a seller's performance of the underlying contract other than written demand. In this respect payment guarnatee can be a more secured facility than a documentary credit. A payment guarantee normally comes into force from the issuing date and shall remain in effect until all sums guaranteed shall be paid in full by a buyer(or a borrower) or by a guarantor. Although a guarantor shall pay a demand made in accordance with the terms and conditions of the payment guarantee, a payment demand may be denied when it is determined to be abusive or unfair.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제22권
• /
• pp.137-171
• /
• 2004

Under Article 2 of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (1993 Revision. UCP), letter of credit means an arrangement whereby an issuing bank is to make a payment to a beneficiary, or is to accept and pay bills of exchange drawn by the beneficiary, or authorises another bank to effect such payment, or to accept and pay such bills of exchange, or to negotiate, against stipulated document(s), provided that the terms and conditions of the letter of credit are complied with. In letter of credit operations, all parties concerned deal with documents, and not with goods, services and/or other performances to which the documents may relate (UCP, Article 4). It is important to note that under UCP, if a letter of credit contains conditions without stating the document(s) to be presented in compliance therewith, banks will deem such conditions as not stated and will disregard them (Article 13 c). Section 5-108(g) of the Uniform Commercial Code also contains a similar provision. However on several occasions the Korean Supreme Court held that non-documentary conditions in letter of credit governed by UCP could be regarded as valid, although they were not desirable in the context of letter of credit transactions. The rationale underlying the decisions was that parties to the letter of credit transactions are free to determine the terms and conditions of the relevant letter of credit. After reviewing the relevant provisions of UCP, UCC, the International Standby Practices (ISP98) and the Supreme Court decisions of Korea, the author suggests that we classify conditions that do not require any documents (so called apparent non-documentary conditions) into two categories and treat them differently. There are apparent non-documentary conditions that are consistent with the nature of letter of credit and those which are inconsistent with the nature of letter of credit. In the first category there are two sub-categories, (i) those which are valid and (ii) those which are invalid and thus should be disregarded. In the second category there are two sub-categories, (i) those which are invalid and thus should be disregarded and (ii) those which are valid but deprive the instrument of the nature as letter of credit.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제13권
• /
• pp.657-677
• /
• 2000

Since January 1, 1999, traders, bankers and their counsels worldwide have available for their use the first set of rules exclusively dealing with standby letters of credit:the International Standby Practices(ISP98). Numerous standbys have alreadby been issued in the United States and worldwide subject to the new ISP. The international banking community is anticipating an increasing demand from their customers to issue ISP-governed undertakings. Before the adoption of ISP, traders and bankers had only the choice of issuing their standby subject to the International Chamber of Commerce's(ICC) Uniform Customs and Practices for Documentary Credits(UCP) and, to a much lesser extent, to the ICC's Uniform Rules for Demand Guarantees(URDG). However, practice showed that UCP rules are not easily adapted to regulate transnational standbys. Indeed, UCP was conceived to govern documentary credits, which are intended to serve as a means of payment. By contrast, standbys are means of guaranty. The core of UCP cannot therefore be appropriate for standby practices and, as a consequence, a number of UCP's provisions have to be excluded in the standby's text. UCP's shortcomings indicated above fulfil the requirements of a key factor for the success of uniform rules. Indeed, to achieve success in the sense of meeting the market's acceptance, any such rules should fill a widely recognized need expressed by merchant community to which such rules are addressed. The ISP cleary has such a vocation. Nonetheless, the already largely encumbered regulatory environment of guarantee devices can hardly go unnoticed. The question therefore arises as to the proper place of ISP in such a context.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제33권
• /
• pp.3-28
• /
• 2007

A non-documentary conditions is a condition contained in the credit without reference to the presented document in compliance therewith, thereby causing many problems to all parties involved in letter of credit transactions. The purpose of this study is to examine the regulations on the non-documentary conditions under Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits: UCP, International Standby Practices: ISP98, United Nations Convention on Independent Guarantee and Stand-by Letters of Credit: CIGSLC and Uniform Commercial Code: UCC and also the opinions on the effect of non-documentary conditions through the analysis of several cases on the non-documentary conditions. The result of this study can be summarized as follows: First, UCP, ISP98, CIGSLC and UCC stipulate that banks will deem non-documentary conditions as not stated and will disregard them. Second, courts used to permit the effect of non-documentary conditions. Finally, all parties should not attempt to put in any non-documentary conditions in order to prevent disputes on the effect of non-documentary conditions.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.323-352
• /
• 1998

Documentary letters of credit including standby letters of credit are governed by the independence or abstraction rule and the doctrine of strict compliance. Since the former rule requires the issuing bank to honor the drafts regardless of the defective performance of the underlying contract, the applicant(the customer) will be without a remedy if he is unable to make himself whole by litigation on the underlying contract. Therefore, the applicant is exposed to a risk much higher than in the commercial letters of credit. The Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credit(UCP) has no provisions allowing legal relief for the applicant on the abuse of L/C by unscrupulous beneficiary, but UCC ${\S}5-114$ has provision allowing injunctive relief for the applicant. In this paper, I attempted to clarify certain standards of injunctive relief available for the customer in the credit. When there is fraud in the L/C transaction by any of the parties concerned, we must weigh the principle of independence or abstraction and the fraud rules. According to banking practice and judicial precedence, we need not keep the principle of independence and abstaction even in fraudulent transaction and the bona fide sufferer must be protected. The purpose of this paper is to review the studies of Fraud rule and the Injunction and to suggest the applicable standards for the Injunction therory under letters of credit. Specially this paper analysed the following ; (1) the guideline for the fraud (exception) rule to the autonomy principle, (2) the appilcable standards of the Injunction, and (3) the implications on parties concerned in letters of credit transaction. Conclusively, the Injunction should be granted if (1) there is clear proof of fraud (2) the fraud constitutes fraudulent abuse if the independent purpose of L/C (3) irreparble injury might follow if injunction is not granted or the recovery of damages would be seriously endangered.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제41권
• /
• pp.51-78
• /
• 2009

The ISP 98 is developed by the American Institute of International Banking Law & Practice in 1998. The ISP98 are also published as ICC Publication No. 590. A detailed commentary on the rules("The Official Commentary on the International Standby Practice") has been written by Professor James E. Byrnes. Presently there is no compelling reason to revise the rules themselves even if ten years is passed since the issuance of ISP98. Insteadthe American Institute of International Banking Law & Practice will provide Model Forms in the early 2009. Special features of the ISP 98 are as the following. Firstly, the ISP 98 is copyrighted by the Institute of International Banking Law and Practice, Inc., and published by the International Chamber of Commerce. Secondly, the ISP 98 differs from UCP in style and approach because it must receive acceptance not only from bankers and merchants, but also from a broader range of those actively involved in standby law and practice corporate treasurees and credit manager, rating agencies, government agencies and regulators, and indenture trustees as well as their counsel. Because standbys are often intended to be available in the event of disputes or applicant insovency, their texts are subject to a degree of scrutiny not encountered in the commercial letter of credit context. Thirdly, the ISP 98 supplement the UCP if the UCP dose not have the relative rule. Lastly, the ISP 98 has the official commentary. In addition, several provision of the ISP 98 would surprise the commercial parties and/or are rather peculiar, while some of them display a certain bias in favor of the banks.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제26권
• /
• pp.203-223
• /
• 2005

Many international transactions involve the use of security devices, commonly referred to as "guarantees", "bonds", or "standby credits", designed to protect one of the parties from a breach by its counter-party. These security mechanisms may be provided by banks, insurance companies, specialized surety companies, or other financial service firms. Although some legal systems distinguish between "guarantees", "bonds", and "indemnities", these terms are often used as synonyms in the everyday language of international traders. It may therefore be necessary to examine the particular characteristics and nature of the guarantee obligation in order to properly classify the guarantee. Two main categories of guarantee are demand and suretyship. Under a demand guarantee, the guarantor must pay on first demand by the beneficiary. The beneficiary only has to demand payment under the guarantee - there is no need to prove that the principal has actually defaulted on a contractual obligation. Under a suretyship or conditional guarantee, the obligation of the guarantor is triggered by the actual default or contractual breach of the principal, as evidenced in a document such as a court judgement or arbitral award against the principal. Guarantees have been widely used in the international business transactions. Main uses of guarantees are as follows : Performance Bonds/Guarantees, Bid(or Tender) Bonds/Guarantees, Advance Payment or Repayment Bonds/Guarantees, Retention Bonds/Guarantees, Maintenance(or Warranty) Bonds/Guarantees etc.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제42권
• /
• pp.133-160
• /
• 2009

In International trade the buyer and seller are normally separated from on another not only by distance but also by differences in language and culture. It is rarely possible for the performance of obligations to be simultaneous and the performance of contracts therefore calls for trust in a situation in which the parties are unlikely to feel able to trust each other unless they have a longstanding and successful relationship. Thus the seller under an international contract of sale will not wish to surrender documents of title to goods to the buyer until he has at least an assurance of payment, and no buyer will wish to pay for goods until he has received them. A gap of distrust thus exists which is often bridged by the undertaking of an intermediary known and trusted by both parties who will undertake on his own liability to pay the seller the contract price in return for the documents of title and then pass the documents to the buyer in return for the reimbursement. This is a common explanation of the theory behind the documentary letter of credit in which the undertaking of a bank of international repute serves as a "guarantee" to each party that the other will perform his obligations. The independence principle, also referred to as the "autonomy principle", is at the core of letter of credit or bank guarantee law. This principle provides that the letter of credit or bank guarantee is independent of the underlying contractual commitment - that is, the transaction that the credit is intented to secure - between the applicant and the beneficiary ; the credit is also independent of the relationship between the bank and its customer, the applicant. The most important exception to the independence principle is the doctrine of fraud in the transaction. A strict interpretation of the rule that the guarantee is independent of the underlying transaction would lead to the conclusion that neither fraud nor manifest abuse of rights by the beneficiary would constitute an objection to payment. There is one major problem related to "Independent guarantees", namely abusive or unfair callings. The beneficiary may make an unfair calling under the guarantee. The countermeasure of beneficiary's unfair calling divided three cases. First, advance countermeasure namely by contract. In other words, when the formation of the contract, the parties must insert the Force Majeure Clause, Arbitration Clause to Contract, and clear statement to the condition for demand calling. Second, post countermeasure namely by court. Many countries, including the United States, authorize the courts to grant an order enjoining the issuer from paying or enjoining the beneficiary from receiving payment under the guaranty letter. Third, Export Insurance. For example, the Export Credit Guarantees Department is prepared, subject to certain conditions, to cover the risk of unfair calling. Of course, KEIC in Korea is cover the risk of the all things for guarantees. On international projects, contractor performance is usually guaranteed by either a standby letters of credit or Independent guarantee. These instruments will be care the parties.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제51권
• /
• pp.263-283
• /
• 2011

There are two typical international rules in issuing guarantee for obligations of party which is responsible to provide some duties such as services, construction, plants, loan repayment, etc. The two internationally recognized rules are currently ISP98 and URDG758. ISP98 was firstly introduced in 1998 for American banks to issue standby letter of credit domestic and overseas for the area where UCP does not cover. URDG was introduced first in 1991 in the name of URDG458 but it has not been widely used and therefore new URDG named URDG758 came out in 2010 to accommodate more standard guarantee practice. At the face of these two prevailing international rules, the users are sometimes confused which rule would be more suitable for their individual transaction. This led us to conduct a comparative analysis on these two rules. Our study suggests that URDG758 is more adequate for construction, ship-building and plants-supply obligations whilst ISP98 is for financial obligations. Also attentions are required when issues such as counter guarantee, governing rule, presentation period, document examination period and default statement exist. This is because ISP98 and URDG758 have different view points.