• 무역학회지
• /
• 제45권5호
• /
• pp.279-301
• /
• 2020

In the absence of any guidance under statutory law, such as the Rules for Construction of Policy, MIA 1906, judges should follow the general principles of interpretation that apply to all contracts. In simple terms, Contra Proferentem Rule means that if the contents of the terms and conditions are ambiguous, they are interpreted against the writer of the terms and conditions. In the Anglo-American Contract Law, the 'default rule' is an important judicial tool that can supplement defects in contract norms and reinforce the principle of private autonomy through gap-filling techniques related to the interpretation of contracts. In Korea, it is sometimes mentioned in case of precedent, and it has been established as a clear rule. This study analyzes the interpretation of terms and conditions is not in the form that the interpretation of other general contracts and other interpretation principles are valid, but contracts based on terms and conditions are also contracts, and as a general rule, the interpretation of terms and conditions is explained like the general contract interpretation.

• 한국정보통신학회논문지
• /
• 제19권12호
• /
• pp.2993-3002
• /
• 2015

국제 물품매매계약에서 INCOTERMS 2010 이 적용되기 시작한 지 5년이 지나면서 그 사용현황과 실무적 적용의 문제점을 분석하기 위하여 지난 10년간 우리나라 수출 거래계약조건과 운송서류 발행 형태를 조사하였다. 조사 결과 첫째, INCOTERMS 2010은 공식 규칙이 아닌 몇 가지 규칙이 사용되고 있으며, 둘째, 해상 및 내수로 운송에 사용되어야 하는 전통적 사용 규칙인 FAS, FOB, CIF, CFR 규칙 사용이 여전히 대부분을 차지하며 모든 운송에 사용되는 규칙으로 변경되지 않고 있다. 셋째, CPT, CIP조건에서 물품의 인도시기 즉 소유권이전의 문제가 이 두 조건의 사용을 활성화 시키지 못하는 실질적 이유가 되고 있다. 넷째, DAT 조건은 사용이 극히 저조 한데 그 이유는 터미널의 장소를 지정이 실무적으로 계약 시점에 확정하기 어렵고 운송 과정에 변경되기도 한다. 이러한 문제점들은 INCOTERMS 2010에 대한 적절한 사용 조건에 대한 보다 적극적인홍보 활동이 필요하며, 거래조건을 해석하고 분쟁 해결을 위한 내용을 서문에 제시하는 것이 바람직 할 것이다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제13권
• /
• pp.3-26
• /
• 2000

The International Chamber of Commerce published the millennium edition of its standard trade definitions, Incoterms 2000. Incoterms are a basic reference for sales contracts, in constant daily use throughout the world. The new version will make it easier for traders to do business in the new century, despite the growing volume and complexity of international transactions. Since Incoterms were first published in 1936, they have been updated six times. They precisely define the responsibilities of buyer and seller and are recognized as the international standard by customs authorities and courts in all the main trading nations. It is important for traders to incorporate the correct Incoterms into their international contracts to avoid unnecessary legal problems. Courts may otherwise interpret trade terms according to often widely divergent national laws and unless the use of Incoterms is specified, expensive legal disputes can arise. Division of costs is a most important element in every contract of sale. The parties must know not only who does what but also how costs resulting therefrom should be divided between them. In most cases the fact that a party must do something means that he must also bear the resulting costs, unless otherwise agreed. But there are many exceptions to this principle and uncertainties arise, particularly with respect to services performed by other parties. Also, difficulties arise with respect to the division of costs whenever additional costs are caused by unexpected events, such as hindrances causing a ship to deviate or to remain in a seaport longer than expected. The main principle of the division of costs is clear enough: the seller has to pay costs necessary for the goods to reach the agreed point of delivery, and the buyer has to pay any further costs after that point. But as noted, it is not always easy to implement this principle in practice, since the detailed distribution of functions under the various trade terms is not and cannot be fully defined in Incoterms. Instead, failing precise stipulations in the contract of sale, guidance must be sought from other criteria such as commercial practices used earlier by the same parties or the custom of trade.

• 정보학연구
• /
• 제7권1호
• /
• pp.121-136
• /
• 2004

본 연구에서는 완전한 무역전자화(paperless)를 목표로 무역업무철자에서 현재 진행되고 있는 무역금융EDI현상을 국제적 동향과 일본의 동향(주로 서류의 전자화)을 중심으로 고찰한 후, 해상적하보험분야에서 종래EDI의 활용과 시스템환경변화에 따른 새로운 EDI적용환경의 적용현상을 토대로 보험회사의 시각을 중심으로 수출입화물에 필요한 화물해상보험계약에서의 EDI적용과 향후과제들을 제시하였다.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제45권4호
• /
• pp.125-136
• /
• 2020

Freight charges are one of the major clauses in the voyage charter. However, in case of unexpected delays at loading and discharging ports, the owner of the ship would not be willing to cover the various costs he should bear by paying the freight receives from the charterer. Therefore, the shipowner, whose time and the ship would be both considered to be an expense, would try to reduce the laytime as least as possible when signing the charter party and to receive compensation such as demurrage and damage for detention from the charterer, just waiting for the agreed laytime to pass. In this study, we review the differences between demurrage and damage for detention and examine the acknowledgeable circumstances through the actual cases. Since the shipowner and the charterer do not often agree on the damage for detention from the respective contract, it is necessary to examine each. Besides, the shipowner and the charterer must acquaint the damage for detention and specify in a contract, to compensate for the actual loss of the shipowner.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제41권4호
• /
• pp.21-40
• /
• 2016

본 연구는 최근 구매주문서 발송을 조건으로 한 매도인의 승낙을 주요 이슈로 하는 CISG상 판례가 있어 이를 소개하고 심층 분석한 논문에 해당한다. 이러한 분석을 위해 CISG상 계약의 성립 관련 조항을 청약과 승낙으로 나누어 고찰하고, 특히 이 판례의 주요 이슈가 되고 있는 대응청약과 승낙의 요건 및 연착된 승낙의 인용 관련 조항을 주로 고찰하였다. 이와 더불어 판례의 분석과 CISG상 관련 조항의 분석을 통해 CISG를 준거법으로 하여 국제물품매매거래에 임하는 거래 당사자들이 유의하여야 할 실무적 시사점을 도출하였다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제27권4호
• /
• pp.91-113
• /
• 2017

UN Convention on International Sale of Goods (CISG) and International Commercial Arbitration aim at the promotion and facilitation of international trade. Both of them share similar general principles; i.e., party autonomy and pacta sunt servanda. Also they are often applied concurrently in the case of the international commercial trade. The purpose of this article is to investigate whether the CISG could apply the formation of the arbitration clause that is included in the main contract governed by CISG. Sellers and buyers have freedom of designating choice of law that is applied to their contracts. An international arbitration agreement is presumed to be separable from the contract in which it is found. However, arbitration clauses commonly form part of a general contract. Thus, the CISG is intended to be applied to dispute resolution clauses, including arbitration clause even if it is not completely suitable. Notably, there is a fundamental distinction between the CISG and arbitration. The CISG abolished the formalities of contract. New York convention requires Contracting States' Courts to enforce written international agreements to arbitrate.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제67권
• /
• pp.49-68
• /
• 2015

In recent years in China, corresponding to a shift in consumption pattern from household basics to greater expenditure on quality of life, new franchising opportunities arise. Although the franchising prospect in China is promising, Korean companies aiming at franchising into China need to be aware of the legal framework for commercial franchise in China as this will have direct impact on their business expansion. Where franchising activities involve trade mark licence, Chinese Franchise Regulations require such trade mark licence agreement to be regulated in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Chinese Trademark Law. Furthermore where one party fails to perform his obligation and it impacts purpose of the contract seriously, the other party could avoid the contract in accordance with the relevant provisions of the Chinese Contract Law. To launch franchising business successfully in China, Korean companies do market research sufficiently before they may commence franchise business. Korean franchisor must register with local authorities in China by own name, and make Chinese partner take charge of management of the distribution network and invitation of franchisee partners.

• 한국산업경영시스템학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국산업경영시스템학회 2002년도 춘계학술대회
• /
• pp.343-348
• /
• 2002

We are concerned with a long-term replenishment contract for the ARIMA demand process in a supply chain. The chain is composed of one supplier, one buyer and consumers for a product. The replenishment contract is based upon the well-known (s, Q) policy but allows us to contract future replenishments at a time with a price discount. Due to the larger forecast error of future demand, the buyer should keep a higher level of safety stock to provide the same level of service as the usual (s, Q) policy. However, the buyer can reduce his purchase cost by ordering a larger quantity at a discounted price. Hence, there exists a trade-off between the price discount and the inventory holding cost. For the ARIMA demand process, we present a model for the contract and an algorithm to find the number of the future replenishments. Numerical experiments show that the proposed algorithm is efficient and accurate.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제25권2호
• /
• pp.152-177
• /
• 2021

Purpose - This study analyses the excepted requirement and burden of proof of the carrier due to unseaworthiness through comparison between the marine transport contract and marine insurance contract. Design/methodology - This study uses the legal analytical normative approach. The juridical approach involves reviewing and examining theories, concepts, legal doctrines and legislation that are related to the problems. In this study a literature analysis using academic literature and internet data is conducted. Findings - The burden of proof in case of seaworthiness should be based on presumed fault, not proved fault. The burden of proving unseaworthiness/seaworthiness should shift to the carrier, and should be exercised before seeking the protections of the law or carriage contract. In other words, the insurer cannot escape coverage for unfitness of a vessel which arises while the vessel is at sea, which the assured could not have prevented in the exercise of due diligence. The insurer bears the burden of proving unseaworthiness. The warranty of seaworthiness is implied in hull, but not protection and indemnity policies. The 2015 Act repeals ss. 33(3) and 34 of MIA 1906. Otherwise the provisions of the MIA 1906 remain in force, including the definition of a promissory warranty and the recognition of implied warranties. There is less clarity about the position when the source of the loss occurs before the breach of warranty but the actual loss is suffered after the breach. Nonetheless, by s.10(2) of the 2015 Act the insurer appears not to be liable for any loss occurring after the breach of warranty and before there has been a remedy. Originality/value - When unseaworthiness is identified after the sailing of the vessel, mere acceptance of the ship does not mean the party waives any claims for damages or the right to terminate the contract, provided that failure to comply with the contractual obligations is of critical importance. The burden of proof with regards to loss of damage to a cargo caused by unseaworthiness is regulated by the applicable law. For instance, under the common law, if the cargo claimant alleges that the loss or damage has been caused by unseaworthiness, then he has the burden of proof to establish the followings: (i) that the vessel was unseaworthy at the beginning of the voyage; and that, (ii) that the loss or damage has been caused by such unseaworthiness. In other words, if the warranty of seaworthiness at the inception of the voyage is breached, the breach voids the policy if the ship owner had prior knowledge of the unseaworthy condition. By contrast, knowingly permitting the vessel to break ground in an unseaworthy condition denies liability only for loss or damage proximately caused by the unseaworthiness. Such a breach does not, therefore, void the entire policy, but only serves to exonerate the insurer for loss or damage proximately caused by the unseaworthy condition.