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
저널정보
한국무역상무학회 무역상무연구 무역상무연구 제44권
발행연도
2009.12
수록면
31 - 55 (25page)

이용수

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

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
This study attempts to provide a comparative overview of the liabilitysystems Korean law and the PELS adopt, that is, the approaches taken byKorean law and the PELS to deal with various irregularities of contractualperformance. In addition, it examines in a comparative way the questionsof what is the position of the seller's liability for his delivery of defectivegoods under the chosen liability system and what is the legal nature of theseller's liability.The study finds that the dual liability system taken by Korean law hascaused some complexities as to the matter of which liability is applicable insome borderline cases. The problem in such complexities is originated inthat the remedies available and the limitation period applicable aredifferentiated in accordance with one's different categorization among threetypes of default under the general liability and defective performance underthe seller's guarantee liability. In this light, the study argues that the unifiedliability system under the PELS is superior because its concept ofnon-performance embraces in a unitary manner all the aspects of defaultincluding defects in quality, quantity and title.In addition, it finds that Korean law has suffered endless debates on thequestion of what are the true contents of the same remedies of rescissionand damages provided under the seller's guarantee liability as under thegeneral liability. The debates have been come along on the basis of thetraditional presumption among some of civil law jurisdictions that twoliabilities be different in terms of not only their legal nature but also theircontents of remedies. The study argues that the problem may becircumvented, first, by another way of thinking that the unified liability inKorean law is inferred from the specification of the identical remedies forboth the general liability and the seller's guarantee liability under the KCC,second, by the preposition that the requirement of fault be depended uponwhat remedy the buyer seeks to claim rather than what liability he does to rely on.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (0)

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-0101-2019-320-000233232