메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
한재필 (동아대학교)
저널정보
한국무역학회 무역학회지 貿易學會誌 第32卷 第1號
발행연도
2007.2
수록면
211 - 240 (30page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

이 논문의 연구 히스토리 (2)

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
This paper is aiming at analysing English Case law on Santander v. Paribas together with the legal opinions of American high legal society, in order to refer it to Korean Case, related to the discounting of deferred payment undertaking credit that has long been utilized as an effective trade financing in the forfait market. In this case, applicant alleged fraud by the beneficiary after the date of discounting by Santander but before the maturity date of deferred payment undertaking as stipulated in the credit. English court decided that the risk of discounting falls on Santander by the application of the rule governing the assignment of contractual rights, UCP 500 and English case law, and the principles of holder in due course.
On the other hand, US position on this case expressed quite opposite opinion in accordance with rules codified in UCC Article 5-109, Fraud and Forgery which provide for an exception to the fraud defence in favour of a confirming bank that has discounted its own credit obligation.
In relation with the case of discounting the deferred payment obligation, Korean Supreme Court has also made a similar decision to that of English court in the Santander case. It has established a new rule which allows the discounting of deferred payment undertaking, provided the terms are incorporated into the Credit, which will be made available for discounting of deferred payment by the nominated bank. This will surely provide excellent opportunities for the forfaiter to prepay or discount the deferred payment, and contributing to the development of international trade finance and forfait industry.
As for the US L/C Law, UCC Article 5 might have a good reason for the US to accommodate local legal problems relating to L/C transactions. But throughout the world, UCP 500 has contributed far more to the unification of L/C customs and practices during last 60 years. It is necessary to mention that we have to try our best effort to keep VCP effectively workable, instead of codifying the national law like UCC Article 5 or by nation to nation.

목차

Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. Santander v. Paribas -영국 상소법원의 판결-
Ⅲ. Santander v. Paribas : 미국 법조인의 견해
Ⅳ. 한국대법원의 판례
Ⅴ. 종합 및 결론
참고문헌
Abstract

참고문헌 (26)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-326-002848297