상법 제814조에 관련된 최근의 판례 검토

Abstract

Under the Commercial Act, the liability of the consignor or the consignee of the sea carrier shall be terminated without agreement in any trial within one year from the date of delivery or on the date of delivery to the consignee, regardless of the cause of the claim, but this period may be extended by agreement of the parties(Article 814 (1)). And if the consignor or the consignee has made an agreement with the carrier or made a legal claim to the carrier within the period of paragraph 1, if the sea carrier has entrusted the transportation to a third party, three months have elapsed since the date of the agreement or claim. The liability of the sea carrier to that third party shall not be extinguished in spite of paragraph 1(Artcile 814 (2)). There has been controversy over the interpretation of Article 814 (1) and (2) of the Commercial Act, and three recent Supreme Court cases have been issued. Thus, this paper examines the matters dealt with in the Supreme Court case and the lower court case by dividing them into major issues and related issues, and sought reasonable improvements. First, whether the completion of contract execution by the sea carrier, the scope of the just consignee, the starting point of the expulsion period, and the period extended by agreement by extension, in addition to the expiration period of paragraph 1, are included in the 'period of paragraph 1' specified in paragraph 2. The Supreme Court's judgment as to whether or not it makes sense is relevant when considering the purpose of the legislation. However, it is a pity that we did not clearly determine when the ʻdelivery dateʼ will be calculated. Second, the Supreme Court's decision on how to determine the legal status of the mixed carrier and the laws that apply to the multimodal transport is valid, but it is a pity that the multimodal carrier has not clearly identified the process of becoming a party to a contract of carriage. Third, in the case of Article 816 (2) based on network liability system, there is a debate about the meaning of the regulations applied to the section with the longest distance and the most expensive section. Fourth, even if the legislative purpose of prompt stabilization of legal relations is taken into consideration, the application of a short period of time even if there is a deliberate or serious negligence on the sea carrier should be excluded, because it is too unreasonable for the carriers and consignees in relatively poor positions.