상법상 운송물 처분청구권과 수하인의 발전적 지위 - 국제운송규범과의 비교를 중심으로 -
A study on the right to dispose of the cargo in Korean Commercial Code
0
조회
0
다운로드
6
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The consignor (in other words, shipper or sender) and holder of the bill of lading is able to ask carrier of stopping the goods in transit, changing a place of delivery or a consignee by his right to dispose of the cargo in carriage of goods. As like the various international legal tools in transportation such as the CMR, Rotterdam rules and Montreal convention, Korean Commercial Code also prescribe this right. This article is about a comparative legal study between international conventions and Korean Law in particular issues about the right to control the shipments. In order to harmonize the Korean Commercial Code with international regulations to avoid any conflicts of Law, this article suggests as follows:First, in the carriage of goods by roads, it is required to clarify whether changing the place of delivery or returning the goods to origin could be works according to article 139. Also, unlike CMR, Korean Law has no restrictions in exercising the right of disposal considering the possibility, carrier's normal practice. Those needs to be clear. Second, in sea transport, Korean Law needs more specific and detailed division according to the types of bill of lading. Lastly, in air transport, an issue of when the shipper's right will be ceased to exist needs more discussion. Unlike Korean law, the Montreal includes a right of returning goods to origin after arrival, thus shipper's right is still working at destination. Thus, it should be considered the revision pursuant to its model tool, the Montreal convention.
Abstract
The consignor (in other words, shipper or sender) and holder of the bill of lading is able to ask carrier of stopping the goods in transit, changing a place of delivery or a consignee by his right to dispose of the cargo in carriage of goods. As like the various international legal tools in transportation such as the CMR, Rotterdam rules and Montreal convention, Korean Commercial Code also prescribe this right. This article is about a comparative legal study between international conventions and Korean Law in particular issues about the right to control the shipments. In order to harmonize the Korean Commercial Code with international regulations to avoid any conflicts of Law, this article suggests as follows:First, in the carriage of goods by roads, it is required to clarify whether changing the place of delivery or returning the goods to origin could be works according to article 139. Also, unlike CMR, Korean Law has no restrictions in exercising the right of disposal considering the possibility, carrier's normal practice. Those needs to be clear. Second, in sea transport, Korean Law needs more specific and detailed division according to the types of bill of lading. Lastly, in air transport, an issue of when the shipper's right will be ceased to exist needs more discussion. Unlike Korean law, the Montreal includes a right of returning goods to origin after arrival, thus shipper's right is still working at destination. Thus, it should be considered the revision pursuant to its model tool, the Montreal convention.
참고문헌 (16)
- 김인현, "해상법", pp.243~ (2011), 법문사
- 김규완, "민법학강의(제10판)", pp.470~ (2011), 신조사(서울)
- 법무부, "상법 항공운송편 제정 자료집", pp.75~ (2009)
- 양석완, "로테르담 규칙에 있어서 운송물처분권에 관한 법적 쟁점", 상사판례연구, 24(2), pp.307~343 (2011), 한국상사판례학회
- 양석완, "운송물처분권에 관한 연구 ― 국제물품매매에 관한 유엔협약(CISG)과의 비교고찰을 중심으로 ―", 한국해법학회지, 32(2), pp.65~103 (2010), 한국해법학회
- 이균성, "신해상법대계", pp.496~ (2010), 한국해양수산개발원
- 이창재, "물류법규상 사업자의 손해배상책임에 관한 연구", 박사, pp.2010
- 정경영, "상법학강의", pp.237~ (2009), 박영사
- 정동윤, "상법(상)", pp.243~ (2010), 법문사
- 정찬형, "상법강의(상)(제14판)", pp.316~ (2011), 박영사
- 최준선, "항공운송증권", 항공우주법학회지, (7), pp.112~ (1995)
- 최준선, "항공화물 무단반송으로 인한 손해배상책임", 15(2), pp.212~, 국제거래법학회
- 최준선, "상법총칙․상행위법", pp.336~ (2010), 삼영사
- 한낙현, "국제무역거래에서 수하인의 지위와 운송물처분권에 관한 연구", 무역학회지, 33(2), pp.115~140 (2008), 한국무역학회
- 한낙현, "로테르담규칙상 운송물처분권자의 권리에 관한 연구", 통상법률, (98), pp.81~116 (2011), 법무부
