• 무역학회지
• /
• 제46권5호
• /
• pp.173-194
• /
• 2021

This study aims to derive precaution points for issuing banks in refusing payment under L/C through literature review and examination of court cases and official opinions of ICC Banking Commission with regard to the provisions of article 16 of UCP 600 that stipulates obligations of issuing banks in refusing payment. If the issuing bank fails to act in accordance with this article, it shall be precluded from claiming that the documents do not constitute a complying presentation. Therefore, it is crucial that issuing banks should be well informed of this article. When discrepant documents are presented, however, issuing banks seldom refuse payment because, in most cases, the applicants waive the discrepancies. For this reason, issuing banks have few chances to deal with payment refusal in practice and thus they occasionally end up failing to observe the provisions of the article. Such court cases include Kookmin Bank and Korean Exchange Bank (currently Hana Bank) that failed to indicate discrepancies in the refusal notice losing the lawsuits. It should be noted that if issuing banks disregard the provisions of article 16 of UCP 600 and thus fail to indicate discrepancies in the refusal notice, they may face fatal situations in which they must make payment against discrepant documents.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제37권
• /
• pp.107-130
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this study is to provide the guideline for the loss of documents relating to the delivery of documents under Letter of Credits transactions. If the documents are lost while in transit from the nominated bank to the issuing bank neither the nominated bank nor the issuing bank is liable as Article. 35 of the UCP600. Normally such matters are settled amicably between banks and problems are only likely to give rise to litigation where this cannot be done and the applicants does not want the goods or take delivery or sell them on because of the loss of documents. UCP 2007 Revision stated that a presentation is complying and forwards the documents to the issuing bank, whether or not the nominated bank has honoured or negotiated, an issuing bank must honour or negotiate, or reimburse that nominated bank. Accordingly, the applicant liable to the issuing bank for any damage sustained as a result of the loss of document. In such circumstance it might be possible to obtain a second(duplicate) set of documents that were sufficient to satisfy the applicant that the document were compliant and enable the applicant to obtain deliver of documents or comply with the terms of a sub-sale. If the applicant does not want the documents presented, no the less, the bank might find it difficult to prove that complaint documents had been presented and, subject to the terms of arrangement with the buyer, could be liable for damage sustained by the applicant as a result the loss of the documents.

• 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.

• 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.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제43권
• /
• pp.117-142
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this paper is to examine the basic principles for the examination of documents in terms of the basic duty to examine the documents, the time allowed to the banks to examine the documents, linkage among the documents, the originality of documents and their issuers, and the rejection formula of documents. Further this author would look at the changes of particular transport document including bill of lading, charter-party bill of lading and so on. From the seller's perspective, the changes of the principles and individual documents under UCP600 are the most important in the sense that they affect the criteria against which the payment is made. The major changes include the omission of the phrase "with reasonable care", in terms of the basic examination principles, substitute the phrase "five banking days following the day of presentation" for the phrase "reasonable time, not to exceed seven banking days following the days of receipt of documents", introduce the new wording about the linkage between the documents tendered, and make clear the meaning of the originality of documents as well as the rejection formula. For transport documents, even though dealing with bill of lading, charter-party bill of lading, transport document covering at least two different modes of transport, freight-forwarder bill of lading and freight collect transport documents, this paper focuses on the "transhipment" of bill of lading and the definition of charter-party bill of lading. Thus, UCP has been changed several times to reflect the new banking customs and practice. It, however, would not answer every questions which users and banks will raise. These questions may be best answered in the particular underlying contract. The UCP are necessary but not a sufficient instrument for the smooth operation of an international trade transaction. The rules are now out: it remains to be seen what the players do with it.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제71권
• /
• pp.107-126
• /
• 2016

This study is to review "on board notation" on a bill of lading under letter of credit transactions. A bill of lading is a type of document that is used to acknowledge the receipt of a shipment of goods. However, UCP 600Article 20 (a)(ii) requires the bill of lading to indicate that the goods have been shipped on board a named vessel at the port of loading stated in the credit by pre-printed wording, or an on board notation indicating the date on which the goods have been shipped on board. The shipped on board statement should relate to loading on board the named vessel at the port of loading stated in the credit. But it doesn't seem that the on board notation clause in the UCP 600 reflect current shipping practice fully because of the various kinds of on board notation and the confusion surrounding their use. There is a need to understand accurately the meanings and requirements of "on board notation" under UCP 600 and the related regulations. So, This paper will be studied the requirements and indication method of "on board notation" on the bill of lading and presented the practical implications under the bill of lading transactions. This study was based on documentary research including preceding research.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제33권
• /
• pp.91-118
• /
• 2007

In the transaction of credits, banks must examine the presentation to determine, on the basis of the documents alone, whether or not the documents appear on their face to constitute a complying presentation. And bank shall each have a maximum of five banking days following the day of presentation to determine if a presentation is complying. This period does not depend on any upcoming expiry date or last day for presentation. Data in a document, when read in context with the credit, the document itself and international standard banking practice, need not be identical to, but must not conflict with, data in i) that document; ii) any other stipulated document; or iii) the credit. When a bank determines that a presentation is complying, it must honour or negotiate. But, when a bank determine that a presentation does not comply, it may refuse to honour or negotiate. When a bank decides to refuse to honour or negotiate, it must give a single notice to that effect to the presenter. That notice must be given by telecommunication or, if that is not possible, by other expeditious means no later than the close of the fifth banking day following the day of presentation.

• 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.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제42권2호
• /
• pp.205-225
• /
• 2017

본 연구는 신용장거래에서 불일치서류에 대한 은행의 지급거절통지의 절차를 한·중 판례를 중심으로 고찰한다. 한·중 무역거래 비중이 높은 상황에서 한국 기업과 신용장을 개설하는 우리나라 은행들이 서류심사 결과로서 지급거절을 통지함에 있어 주의해야 하는 사항들과 신용장 관련 분쟁을 해결하기 위한 방안에 대한 제언을 목적으로 한다. 본 연구에서 고찰한 판례는 중국 매도인이 개설은행을 상대로 중국법원에 소를 제기한 것으로, 개설은행의 지급거절통지가 UCP 600 제16조 (c)항 (ii) (iii)의 내용적인 요건을 충족하지 못한다고 판시한 중국법원의 판결이다. 본 판결을 볼 때, 우리나라 기업들과 신용장 개설은행들은 첫째, UCP 600 제16조 (c)항의 규정에 근거하여 하자에 대한 통지의 내용을 자세하게 기재해야 한다. 둘째, 신용장 계약에서도 무역계약 마찬가지로 준거법에 대한 합의를 명확히 하는 것이 필요하다. 셋째, 한·중거래에서 중국법원의 편파적인 판결과 더불어 외국법원의 판결이 중국에서 집행이 어려운 점을 감안해서 분쟁해결 방식으로 중재를 활용하는 것이다. 신용장 개설 시 중재조항을 삽입하여 법적인 효력을 갖도록 하고, 국제신용장중재센터나 DOCDEX 시스템을 활용하는 것을 권고한다.

• 한국무역상무학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국무역상무학회 2006년도 제36회 한학협동공개세미나
• /
• pp.117-150
• /
• 2006