본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

CISG에 있어서 물품의 부적합과 계약해제48) -CISG-AC Opinion no.5의 해석에 있어서 본질적 계약위반의 의미를 중심으로-

Fundamental Breach of Contract in Cases of Non-conforming Goods in CISG-AC Opinion No.5

0

조회

0

다운로드

14

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

CISG-AC Opinion no 5 is about the buyer’s right to avoid the contract in cases of non-conforming goods or documents. When this is interpreted on a fundamental level, the following conclusion can be reached. When international goods are being sold, according to article 35, the seller has the responsibility of delivering the appropriate good. However, when this deal is not upheld, and a good that is not in conformity with the contract is delivered, the seller must bear a certain amount of responsibility. In this case, the judgment of the default at hand is left to article no. 35. As stated in said article, an item’s default or inconformity is determined by the two parties’ contract. Hence, on principle, the contract needs to be the standard of judgment. When it is unclear or insufficient, the item’s purpose of use and its quality should be the standards of measure. Additionally, because delivering the inappropriate item is a breach of contract on part of the seller, a uniform liability system is being utilized. The duality liability system that is being upheld in Korean laws (nonfulfillment of an obligation laws and responsibility for the warranty) needs to be rejected and the special characteristics of the responsibility for the warranty must be threaded in as a requirement. A uniform liability system must be made, and subsequent issues should be judged upon these rules. In this circumstance, in terms of utility, we compared this with our nation’s laws on the effects that a uniform liability system can have in deal making. Also, if the item’s lack of conformity with the contract is also the seller’s fault, according to the way the contract was worded, the buyer has two options to fix the situation. This manuscript has analyzed the actual meaning of the fundamental breach of contracts based on CISG-AC Opinion no.5 and other annotations. We have also examined actual cases.

Abstract

CISG-AC Opinion no 5 is about the buyer’s right to avoid the contract in cases of non-conforming goods or documents. When this is interpreted on a fundamental level, the following conclusion can be reached. When international goods are being sold, according to article 35, the seller has the responsibility of delivering the appropriate good. However, when this deal is not upheld, and a good that is not in conformity with the contract is delivered, the seller must bear a certain amount of responsibility. In this case, the judgment of the default at hand is left to article no. 35. As stated in said article, an item’s default or inconformity is determined by the two parties’ contract. Hence, on principle, the contract needs to be the standard of judgment. When it is unclear or insufficient, the item’s purpose of use and its quality should be the standards of measure. Additionally, because delivering the inappropriate item is a breach of contract on part of the seller, a uniform liability system is being utilized. The duality liability system that is being upheld in Korean laws (nonfulfillment of an obligation laws and responsibility for the warranty) needs to be rejected and the special characteristics of the responsibility for the warranty must be threaded in as a requirement. A uniform liability system must be made, and subsequent issues should be judged upon these rules. In this circumstance, in terms of utility, we compared this with our nation’s laws on the effects that a uniform liability system can have in deal making. Also, if the item’s lack of conformity with the contract is also the seller’s fault, according to the way the contract was worded, the buyer has two options to fix the situation. This manuscript has analyzed the actual meaning of the fundamental breach of contracts based on CISG-AC Opinion no.5 and other annotations. We have also examined actual cases.

참고문헌 (28)

  1. 곽윤직, "채권총론" (2009), 박영사
  2. 곽윤직, "민법주해(14)", ~
  3. 송덕수, "사례연습" (2003), 박영사
  4. 지원림, "채권각론" (2011), 홍문사
  5. 지원림, "채권총론" (2011), 홍문사
  6. 석광현, "국제물품매매계약의 법리" (2010), 박영사
  7. 석광현, "국제물품매매계약에 관한 국제연합협약(CISG)상의 본질적 계약위반", 법학논총, 23(2), pp.437~480 (2006), 법학연구소
  8. 吳元奭, "國際物品賣買契約에서 物品에 대한 賣渡人의 契約適合義務-UN 統 一 賣買法 第35條를 中心으로 -", 무역학회지, 27(3), pp.1~16 (2002), 한국무역학회
  9. 오현석, "국제상거래법 체제상 하자담보책임에 관한 비교 연구", 한양법학, (35), pp.301~329 (2011), 한양법학회
  10. 하강헌, "국제물품매매에서 물품의 일치성에 관한 고찰 -CISG 사례를 중심으로-", 무역학회지, 32(2), pp.399~420 (2007), 한국무역학회
  11. 심종석, "국제상사계약에 있어 물품의 계약적합성에 기한 담보책임과 그 법적 기준에 관한 고찰- CISG 제35조의 적용에 따른 판결례를 중심으로", 관세학회지, 8(1), pp.259~282 (2007), 한국관세학회
  12. 임홍근, "국제물품매매계약에 관한 UN 협약상의 문제점" (1991), 삼지원
  13. 윤일구, "하자담보책임의 고찰과 입법적 제언", 법학논총, 30(1), pp.421~451 (2010), 법학연구소
  14. 이준형, "受給人의 瑕疵擔保責任에 있어 瑕疵의 槪念", 민사법학, (25), pp.75~111 (2004), 한국민사법학회
  15. 박수곤, "프랑스법에서의 建築受給人의 瑕疵擔保責任", 한양법학, 14
  16. 여하윤, "프랑스 건설도급의 현황과 쟁점 -프랑스 민법상 건축수급인의 하자담보책임을 중심으로-", 홍익법학, 11(1), pp.1~26 (2010), 법학연구소
  17. 현소혜, "독일 건설도급의 현황과 쟁점", 홍익법학, 11(1), pp.27~55 (2010), 법학연구소
  18. 곽민희, "建築受給人의 瑕疵擔保責任에 있어서 約定違反의 瑕疵", 동아법학, (52), pp.605~631 (2011), 법학연구소
  19. 최흥섭, "국제물품매매계약에 관한 유엔협약 해설" (2005), 법무부
  20. 曽野裕夫, "ウィーン売買条約(CISG)における物品の不適合に関する規律-瑕疵担保責任の不存在とその 理由", 法理時報, 80(8)
  21. 斎藤彰, "ウィーン売買法と瑕疵担保責任, 国際取引法" (2002), 法律文化社
  22. Del Duca, "Problems and materials on sales under the Uniform Commercial Code and the Convention on International Sale of Goods" (1993), Cincinnati
  23. Lawrence, "Symposium : The Revision of Article 2 of the Uniform Commercial Code : Appropriate Standards for a Buyer’s Refusal to Keep Goods Tendered by a Seller", Wm and Mary L. Rev, 35 (1994)
  24. Schlechtriem, "Commentary on the UN Convention on the International Sale of Goods(CISG)" (2005), Oxford
  25. Benjamin, "Sale of Goods" (2002), Commentary on the International Sales Law
  26. "Sales Convention", ~ (1987)
  27. Treitel, "Remedies for Breach of contract" (1988), Oxford
  28. Rabel, "Recht des Warenkaufs, Volume 2" (1985), Tübingen 1

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (8건)