국제물품매매계약에 관한 유엔협약상 이행기 전 계약위반의 구제수단과 민법에 대한 시사점

이영경 법조협회 2020 法曹 Vol.69 No.4

United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, “CISG”), was accepted and is effective in South Korea. CISG has some provisions for remedies in case of anticipatory breach of contract. Article 71 provides that a party may suspend the performance of his obligations, if it becomes apparent that the other party will not perform a substantial part of his obligations due to certain reasons. Article 72 provides that, if prior to the date for performance of the contract it is clear that one of the parties will commit a fundamental breach of contract, the other party may declare the contract avoided. Article 73 provides for special rules applicable to installment contract. These provisions are different from the way the Korean Civil Code (“KCC”) deals with similar circumstances. The KCC has Article 536, Paragraph 2 whereby a party may refuse performance of its obligation in case where there is any significant cause existing by which the other party’s performance becomes difficult, The proviso of Article 544 of the KCC provides that, if an obligor declares in advance his intention that he will not perform its obligation, no peremptory notice shall be required for terminating the contract. Although some scholars and court cases apply the Article 544 or its proviso and principle of good faith for termination of contract in case of anticipatory breach of contract, it seems not sufficient to deal with termination of contract in case of anticipatory breach of contract and some legal uncertainties arise. By comparison, CISG provides for remedies in case of anticipatory breach of contract in details in Articles 71, 72 and 73. It should be meaningful to review Articles 71, 72 and 73 and consider how to interpret and amend the KCC. Recently, there has been discussion about amendment of the KCC in order to provide matters about anticipatory breach of contract. It is necessary to consider the problems arising from the lack of provisions in KCC relating to anticipatory breach of contract clearly and make progress in the near future to resolve the problems. 국제물품매매계약에 관한 국제적 규범인 국제물품매매계약에 관한 유엔협약(United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, 이하 “국제물품매매협약”)은 우리나라에 수용되어 국내법으로서 효력을 가지고 있다. 국제물품매매협약은 제71조 내지 제73조에서 이행기 전의 계약위반시 구제수단에 대하여 규정하고 있다. 의무불이행은 이행기가 도래하여야 발생하는 것이 원칙이지만, 채무자의 이행거절이나, 신용도의 하락 또는 재정상태의 악화 등 사정이 생겨 이행기가 도래하였을 때 의무를 이행하지 않을 것임이 예견되는 경우에는 이행기 도래 전이라도 상대방에게 구제수단을 인정할 필요가 생긴다. 이러한 이행기 전의 계약위반에 대하여 국제물품매매협약은 제71조에서 상대방이 의무의 실질적 부분을 이행하지 않을 것으로 판명된 경우 선이행의무의 이행정지권을, 제72조에서 상대방이 본질적인 계약위반을 할 것임이 명백한 경우에 계약해제권을 인정한다. 그리고 제73조는 분할인도계약에 대한 특칙으로서 분할인도계약의 해제에 관하여 규정하고 있다. 이들 조항은 영미법상 이행기 전의 계약위반 개념을 기반으로 각국의 이해관계를 조율한 결과물로서, 이러한 경우에 대한 민법의 규정 내용과는 차이가 있다. 민법은 이행기 전의 계약위반에 대하여 상세한 조항을 마련하고 있지 않고, 제536조 제2항에서 불안의 항변권을 두고 있는 정도이다. 민법 제544조 단서는 이행거절의 경우 계약해제에 대하여 규정하는데, 판례는 동 조항과 함께 신의칙을 적용하여 이행기 전 계약위반시 계약해제를 인정하고 있지만 이러한 방법으로는 한계가 있다. 국제물품매매협약은 국내법적 효력을 가진다는 점에서 중요성이 큰데, 이행기 전의 계약위반시 처리에 대하여 상세히 규정하고 있어 시사하는 바가 크다. 본고에서는 동 협약 제71조 내지 제73조의 규정내용에 대하여 살펴보고, 민법의 불안의 항변권과 이행기 전의 계약위반시 계약해제의 문제를 검토한다. 그리고 협약과 민법의 규정내용을 비교하여 차이점을 살펴보고, 이행기 전의 계약위반에 관한 해석상 문제와 입법적 고려사항에 대하여 생각해 본다. 향후 민법개정시 이행기 전의 계약위반에 관한 법조문의 도입과 정비를 적극적으로 검토하여야 할 것이다.

민법상 도급과 산업안전보건법의 도급과 발주

김봉수 강원대학교 비교법학연구소 2024 江原法學 Vol.74 No.-

A contract for work is similar to a contract for employment and a mandate in that the contractor provides labor and is paid for it. However, a contract for work differs from employment and mandate in that the recipient is obligated to the outcome of the work, not the labor itself. The distinction between a contract for work and other contracts is determined by the terms and conditions agreed upon by the parties to the contract. The name or form of the contract is not important in making this distinction, but factors such as the intent of the parties, their motivations for entering into the contract, and the status of the parties. This distinction allows us to determine the civil law rules that may apply to an individual contract. The distinction between a contract for work and a labor contract is a matter of identifying who is responsible for labor law. Even if the contract is in the form of a contract for work, if it is in fact a labor contract, the person who ordered the work is liable as an employer under labor law. The key distinction between a contract for work and a labor contract is the existence of an employer's right to direct the work. The Occupational Safety and Health Act was amended in 2020 to strengthen the responsibilities of contractors (the person who ordered the work). The revised OSH Act defines contracting for work as entrusting one's work to another. This means that various types of contracts, such as contract for employment, mandate, and assignment of work, are included in the scope of contract for work. The basis for the liability of the person who ordered the work under the OSH Act is that he or she caused his or her workers to work with the contractor's workers. Next, the OSH Act does not stipulate the criteria under which the person who ordered the work is liable. However, the standard for the contractor to be held liable is whether it is able to control the risks that can cause industrial accidents. Finally, the OSH Act defines a person placing an order for construction works apart from the person who ordered the work. These provisions can be seen as taking into account the general contractor relationship in construction.

「2013년 민법개정시안」에 대한 검토 - 계약법총론에 관한 규정을 중심으로 -

김대정 한국토지법학회 2018 土地法學 Vol.34 No.2

본고는 「2013년 민법개정시안」 중 계약법 총칙에 관한 민법개정안의 당부를 검토하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 이를 위하여 계약법 총칙의 주요쟁점을 계약의 성립, 계약의 일반적 효력, 계약의 일방적 해소의 3개 장(章)으로 나누어 검토하였다. Ⅰ. 계약의 성립에 관한 민법개정안1. 청약의 구속력 : ‘계약의 청약은 철회할 수 없다’는 것을 기본입장으로 하는 현행민법과는 정반대로, 「2013년 민법개정시안」은 ‘청약은 원칙적으로 철회될 수 있다’는 것을 기본입장으로 하여 이와 모순되는 현행민법의 규정을 삭제하고 현행민법 제527조 내지 제534조에 해당하는 8개 조문을 제529조, 제530조, 제534조의 3개 조문으로 정리할 것을 제안하고 있다. 필자도 이러한 「2013년 민법개정시안」의 개정방안에 대하여 기본적으로 찬성한다. 다만, ‘승낙의 통지가 승낙기간(또는 상당한 기간) 내에 도착하지 못하고 연착된 경우에는 청약의 의사표시는 효력을 상실한다’고 하더라도, ‘연착된 승낙은 청약자가 이를 새 청약으로 보아 승낙함으로써 계약을 성립시킬 수 있다’고 규정한 현행민법 제530조는 존치시키는 것이 타당하다고 생각한다. 2. 계약의 성립시기 : 「2013년 민법개정시안」은 격지자 사이의 계약의 성립시기에 관하여 「발신주의」를 취한 현행민법 제531조를 삭제하고, 「도달주의」에 입각한 새로운 조문인 제534조를 신설할 것을 제안하고 있다. 이러한 입법주의의 전환은 타당하다고 생각한다. 문제는 「2013년 민법개정시안」이 제527조에서 “계약은 당사자가 법적 구속을 받을 의사로 그 내용을 확정할 수 있는 합의에 이르면 성립한다.”는 규정을 신설할 것을 제안하고 있다는 점이다. 이는 ‘계약은 합의에 의하여 성립한다’는 계약법의 일반원칙을 선언한 규정이라고 생각되나, 민법전에 이러한 당연한 법리를 내용으로 하는 선언적 규정을 둘 필요가 있는지는 의문이다. 또한 동조는 ‘당사자가 법적 구속을 받을 의사로 합의한 경우에 한하여 계약이 성립한다’는 취지로 해석될 여지가 있어서, 「표시주의계약이론」의 입장에서는 ‘동의할 수 없는 문제조항’이라는 비판을 피하기 어렵다고 생각된다. 또한 개인의 사상이나 가치관에 따라 관점의 차이가 있을 수 있는 문제에 대하여 어느 한 쪽의 편향된 시각을 반영한 일반규정을 민법전에 두는 것은 타당하지 않다고 생각된다. 3. 원시적 불능을 목적으로 하는 계약 : 「2013년 민법개정시안」 제535조는 독일민법 제311조a의 규정을 모범으로 한 것이며, 타당한 입법주의의 전환이라고 생각한다. Ⅱ. 계약의 일반적 효력에 관한 민법개정안1. 사정변경의 원칙 : ① 「2013년 민법개정시안」은 「계약의 효력」의 관(款)에 「사정변경」에 관한 제538조의2를 신설할 것을 제안하고 있는데, 이는 계약해제⋅해지에 관한 규정 가운데 「사정변경」에 관한 일반규정을 신설할 것을 제안하고 있었던 「2004년 민법개정안」에 비하면 진일보한 것이라고 평가할 수 있다. 다만, 「사정변경의 원칙」에 관한 신설규정은 쌍무계약의 특수한 효력인 위험부담에 관한 제538조 뒤에 두는 것 보다는 「계약의 구속력의 원칙」을 밝힌 조문을 제2관(계약의 효력) 맨 앞에 두고, 「사정변경의 원칙」을 규정한 조문은 그에 대한 예외규정이라는 점을 명확하게 부각시키기 위하여 그 바로 뒤에 규정하는 것이 타당하다고 생각된다. ② 「2013년 민법 ... The purpose of this Study is to review on the general provisions of the Contract Law in 「the 2013 Draft of Revised Bill of Korean Civil Code」. For this purpose, the main issues of the general provisions of the Contract Law were divided into three chapters: in the first place the establishment of the contract, in the second place the general effect of the contract, and the last the unilateral cancellation of the contract. Ⅰ. The (Draft of) Revised Bill of the Korean Civil Code on the establishment of the contract 1. The binding force of an offer : The current Korean Civil Code is based on the theory of ‘an offer cannot be withdrawn in principle’. However, in contrast to that of the current Korean Civil Code the basic position of 「the 2013 Draft of Revised Bill of Korean Civil Code」 is that ‘an offer can be withdrawn in principle’. Therefore, it proposes to delete the conflicting provisions(from §527 to §534) of the current Korean Civil Code and to organize eight clauses to three articles(§529, §530, and §534). I am also basically in favor of the revision of 「the 2013 Draft of Revised Bill of Korean Civil Code」. 2. The time of establishment of contract : 「The 2013 Draft of Revised Bill of Korean Civil Code」 proposes that §531 of the current Korean Civil Code, which take the principles of sending on the time of the establishment of contract was deleted and a new clause of §534 based on the new principles of arrival will be newly­established. I think this transition of legislation is valid. It should be noted that 「The 2013 Draft of Revised Bill of Korean Civil Code」 proposes to newly­establish §527 that prescribes “Contracts shall be established when the parties reach an agreement to confirm that they are willing to be legally bound.” This is meaningful in that it declares the general principle of the contract law that ‘contracts are formed by agreement’. However, it is questionable whether it is necessary for the civil code to have a statutory declaration that is matter of course. And there is room for interpretation to be made to the effect that ‘the parties acknowledge the establishment of the contract only when they agree that they intend to be legally bound’. Thus, from the perspective of the 「the principles of indication」, there may be criticism that ‘the clause is totally unacceptable’. It is not reasonable to have a general rule that reflects either side's biased view of the law on matters that may differ in perspective depending on individual ideas or values. Therefore, the above clause(§527) will have to be deleted. 3. A contract with a view to primitive impotence : The §535 of 「the 2013 Draft of Revised Bill of Korean Civil Code」 take the provision §311a of the German Civil Code as a model. I think this is a fair change of legislative’s principle. Ⅱ. The (Draft of) Revised Bill of the Korean Civil Code on the General Effect of Contract 1. The principle of change of circumstances : ① 「The 2013 Draft of Revised Bill of the Korean Civil Code」 stipulates the new clause §538­2 on the principle of change of circumstances in subsection of 「the Effect of Contract」. ② 「The 2013 Draft of Revised Bill of the Korean Civil Code」 provides for a more specific and clear application of the principle of change of circumstances. However, it is necessary to add to §538­2 the requirement that ‘the change of circumstances will not be attributable to the parties’. ③ 「The 2013 Draft of Revised Bill of the Korean Civil Code」 states that “the parties may request the modification of the contract or cancel or terminate the contract”. This denies the possibility of changing the contract through court intervention, and this means that the disadvantaged party acknowledges that it has the option to choose between the right to amend the contract and the right to cancel the contract. This would result in an adverse effect on 「the p...

하도급 불공정거래에 관한 법적 고찰

조승현 민주주의법학연구회 2023 민주법학 Vol.- No.81

Sub-contracts made between individuals are also generally allowed under the principle of freedom of contract. Therefore, it is not easy to find a general legal basis to control Sub-contracting unless there is a mandatory law specifically regulating Sub-contracts. However, it is legally and practically impossible to completely ban Sub-contracting by law. The harm of multi-level Sub-contracting is a serious situation in reality, and it can be said to be a typical blind spot where the principle of practical contract process does not work. Legal efforts to prevent the negative effects of Sub-contracting have been made in various directions. The purpose of this article is to dispel the suspicion that the strengthening of regulations on Sub-contracting severely undermines the freedom of contract, and to explain the need to take measures to strengthen Sub-contractor and Sub-contracting workers' rights. Examining from a normative point of view the justification on the need for stronger legal measures when the balance of power is structurally compromised between the contracting parties, by improving the legal means of contract control to restore the collapsing party equality among contracting parties, it is intended to provide a small help in overcoming the evils of Sub-contracting practices. 사인 사이에 이루어지는 하도급계약도 계약자유의 원칙상 일반적으로 허용된다. 따라서 특별히 하도급을 규제하는 강행법규가 없는 한 하도급을 통제할 일반적인 법적 근거를 찾는 것은 쉽지 않다. 그렇다고 하도급을 법률로 전면 금지하는 것은 법적으로나 현실적으로 불가능하다. 다단계식의 하도급의 폐해는 현실적으로 심각한 상황이고 실질적인 계약공정의 원칙이 작동하지 않는 전형적인 사각지대라고 할 수 있다. 하도급의 부정적 기능을 막기 위한 법적 노력들이 다양한 방향에서 이루어져 왔다. 이 글의 목적은 하도급에 관한 규제강화가 계약자유를 심하게 훼손한다는 의구심을 불식하고 오히려 열악한 하수급과 하수급근로자의 권리를 강화하는 조치를 취해야 하는 점을 설명하는 데 있다. 계약당사자 사이에 구조적으로 힘의 균형이 현저하게 훼손된 경우, 보다 강화된 법적 조치의 필요성에 대한 정당성을 규범적 관점에서 검토하면서, 계약당사자 사이에서 무너진 당사자 대등성을 회복하기 위한 계약 통제의 법적 수단들을 검토 개선하여 하도급관행의 폐단 극복에 일조하고자 하는 것이다.

Signaling Pathway of Lysophosphatidic Acid-Induced Contraction in Feline Esophageal Smooth Muscle Cells

남윤성,서정숙,송현주,손의동 대한약리학회 2013 The Korean Journal of Physiology & Pharmacology Vol.17 No.2

Lysolipids such as LPA, S1P and SPC have diverse biological activities including cell proliferation,differentiation, and migration. We investigated signaling pathways of LPA-induced contraction in feline esophageal smooth muscle cells. We used freshly isolated smooth muscle cells and permeabilized cells from cat esophagus to measure the length of cells. Maximal contraction occurred at 10−6 M and the response peaked at 30s. To identify LPA receptor subtypes in cells, western blot analysis was performed with antibodies to LPA receptor subtypes. LPA1 and LPA3 receptor were detected at 50 kDa and 44kDa. LPA-induced contraction was almost completely blocked by LPA receptor (1/3) antagonist KI16425. Pertussis toxin (PTX) inhibited the contraction induced by LPA, suggesting that the contraction is mediated by a PTX-sensitive G protein. Phospholipase C (PLC) inhibitors U73122 and neomycin, and protein kinase C (PKC) inhibitor GF109203X also reduced the contraction. The PKC-mediated contraction may be isozyme-specific since only PKCε antibody inhibited the contraction. MEK inhibitor PD98059 and JNK inhibitor SP600125 blocked the contraction. However, there is no synergistic effect of PKC and MAPK on the LPA-induced contraction. In addition, RhoA inhibitor C3exoenzyme and ROCK inhibitor Y27632 significantly, but not completely, reduced the contraction. The present study demonstrated that LPA-induced contraction seems to be mediated by LPA receptors (1/3),coupled to PTX-sensitive G protein, resulting in activation of PLC, PKC-ε pathway, which subsequently mediates activation of ERK and JNK. The data also suggest that RhoA/ROCK are involved in the LPA-induced contraction.

노무도급과 위장도급

김봉수 ( Bong Su Kim ) 안암법학회 2012 안암 법학 Vol.0 No.39

The contract for work and illegal dispatch are easily distinguishable from each other, but in practical cases, it is hard to tell them. That is because of the diversity of the form of contract for work. According to the principle of private autonomy, the contracting parties can formulate various substance of contract, and this will make harder to find the differences between them. Especially the issue that separating the contract for work and illegal dispatch is related not only to the civil law but also related to labor law, therefore it is a very significant issue practically or theoretically. But the discussion until now is criticized in the view of legal stability. The discussion was normally, in labor law`s point of view, to protect workers. It has lack of understanding of principles of private law. As mentioned before, the contract for work and the illegal dispatch should be distinguished by the purpose of contract, the will of contracting parties and substance of contract liability. By this classification, we can tell whether it is subcontract, employment or illegal dispatch. But it has obvious limitation of standards. And when we consider these issues in the aspect of ``civil law``, the protection of workers can be neglected. In this respect, the division between contract for work and illegal dispatch is the matter of legislative decision. And for alternative solution, there is discriminative remedy for workers with regular contract. This can reduce many issues caused by distinguishing the contract for work from the illegal dispatch.

국어 후음 계열의 축약 현상에 대하여

배영환 개신어문학회 2015 개신어문연구 Vol.40 No.-

The purpose of this study is to examine a few issues associated with the contraction phenomenon in Korean. In Korean, contraction can be considered to be the phenomenon that two phonemes are combined to be a single phoneme. It is the phenomenon that the number of phonemes is reduced in the process of phonological changes. Of phenomena treated as the contraction in the previous discussion, a phonological phenomenon difficult to be regarded as contraction and phenomenon newly regarded as contraction were reviewed. In some cases, it is not easy to describe the scope of contraction and process of contraction with aspiration, the representative phonological phenomenon of contraction. With regard to the scope of contraction, so called the contraction phenomenon does not belong to the category of contraction in the strict sense. They also included things not easy to be explained only by glide formation or phonological aspects. And of the problems on the process of contraction, when ‘ㅈ’ etc. come in front of ‘ㅎ’ as shown in ‘[ichida]’, it is not easy to explain that it has been aspirated after going through syllable-final plain stops or ‘ㅈ’ and ‘ㅎ’ have been directed contracted. A phonological phenomenon that can be newly regarded as contraction is related to ‘ㆆ’. ‘ㆆ’ can be considered to be a phoneme appropriate to describe the irregular verbs of Korean and be understood in terms of showing the feasibility of phonological skills. According to the utilization aspect shown in ‘Jikko, Jieuni, Jieo’, it is difficult to explain that the utilization aspect of the previous period has been fossilized into modern Korean. Therefore, it is reasonable to recognize ‘ㆆ’ and regard it as the resulting contraction. ‘ㆆ’ can be considered as an element of glottalizing a following ending immediately without being changed or neutralized into ‘ㄷ’. By considering so, there is an advantage that it can be described in parallel with the aspiration phenomenon in which ‘ㅎ’ is shown.

국제건설계약에서 공사변경(variation)에 따른 공사범위(scope of works)의 계약해석 -영국판례를 중심으로-

정홍식 ( Hong Sik Chung ) 법조협회 2016 法曹 Vol.65 No.2

International construction contracts will define the scope of works that the contractor is required to undertake in exchange for an ascertainable contract price. In determining whether there is a variation, it will be necessary to consider whether the work under review was part of that original scope. There is no requirement for an employer to issue instructions directing the work, which already forms part of the contract scope. In the event, however, the work needs to made beyond the scope of work, such employer’s instruction should be made that may result in impact of duration and price of the contract. However, the definition of what is to be built may not be fully developed and articulated in the contract documents. Thus, ascertaining what constitutes the contract scope of works, against which variations will be judged, involves not only an analysis of the description of the works contained in the technical documents, such as specification and drawings; it is also a matter of considering the risks that the contractor has assumed under the contract. The technical description of the works as contained in the contract documents will often contain ambiguities, gaps and contradictions. In order to determine the correct extent of the contractor’s obligations, it will be necessary to apply the principles of contract interpretation. This article deals with the matter of contract interpretation in light of assessing the scope of works by focusing on relevant England cases as many international construction contracts have English law as a governing law. Some England cases may provide good practical guidances for Korean contractors when they negotiate and adopt the construction contracts.

국제물품매매협약(CISG) 적용 하에서 매매계약 체결에 관한 실무적 고려사항

정홍식 법무부 2010 통상법률 Vol.- No.94

무역입국을 표방하는 우리나라에서 이제 CISG의 중요성은 다언을 요하지 않는다. 지금까지의 비교법적 차원에서의 이론적 연구에 더해 이제는 협약의 적용을 가정하고 보다 효과적이고 유리한 매매계약 체결을 위한 실무적인 지침에 관심을 기울여야 한다. 그렇다면 물품매매에서 협약을 준거법으로 선택하는 것이 우리 기업들에게 유리한가? 이에 대해 협약을 연구하는 상학자들 뿐 아니라 법학자들의 대부분은 긍정적인 견해를 표명하고 있다. 즉, 매매계약 체결과정에서 우리의 교섭력(bargaining power)이 떨어져 우리나라 민․상법을 준거법으로 택하는 것이 현실적으로 어렵다면 타방 당사자 국가의 국내법보다는 중립적인 형태의 협약을 적용하는 것이 우리 기업에게 훨씬 유리하다. 타방 당사자가 우월적 지위를 가지고 있더라도 양 국가에 공히 조약으로 편입되어 공통분모가 되는 협약의 적용 요청을 거절하기에는 쉽지 않을 것이다. 또한 우리나라 민·상법이 국내법이기에 국제물품매매를 규율하기에 적합하지 않은 많은 조항이 존재한다는 점도 협약을 선호해야 하는 또 다른 이유이기도 하다. 본고는 협약이 매매계약의 준거법으로 적용되는 것을 가정하고, '그렇다면 당사자가 협약 내용을 그대로 받아들여야 하는가?' 라는 질문에서부터 출발한다. 질문에 대한 답은 협약 제6조, '당사자는 협약의 전체 또는 일부 규정의 적용을 배제하거나 그 규정의 효과를 변경할 수 있다' 에서 찾을 수 있다. 즉, 협약은 임의규정이기에 당사자의 사적 자치 원칙을 최우선으로 고려하고 있다. 물론 적용배제나 효과변경이 한 당사자의 일방적 의사만으로는 허용되지 않고, 당사자 간 합의에 의해서만 가능하다. 결국 매매계약에 어떤 합의가 들어가느냐는 모든 사안에 우선하기 때문에 당사자 각각의 교섭력에 의해 유리한 방향으로 협약 규정의 효과를 변경시키는 것이 중요하다. 왜냐하면 협약에는 당사자가 처한 상황에도 불구하고 그대로 적용되면 불합리한 결과를 초래할 수 있는 다수의 조항들이 존재하기 때문이다. 이에 본고는 계약 체결 시 당사자가 고려해야 할 사항들을 협약 전반에 걸쳐 살펴보고, 그에 따른 실무적인 지침 및 샘플 영문조항을 제공하고 있다. 당사자가 샘플 영문조항을 채택하여 자신의 계약에 반영하면 협약의 관련 조항의 효과는 채택된 영문조항으로 변경됨을 의미한다. 여기에서는 지면의 제한 상 협약에 관한 실무지침을 망라할 수는 없고 주요 부분만을 중심으로 다루고 있다. This article is written primarily for the practitioner and reviews some of the areas in which the Convention (or 'CISG' ) will require different contract drafting techniques. It (1) describes the Convention in a nutshell and the reasons why attorneys and their clients should know something about the Convention, (2) briefly analyzes when the Convention is applicable, and (3) suggests various ways to adjust contract forms and contracting practices to take into account the Convention's provisions. The Convention governs (1) contracts for the sale (2) of goods when (3) the transaction is international as defined by the Convention. The Convention defines only the third of these elements. As to the first two elements, the Convention provides some guidance by its articles that exclude certain issues and types of transaction from the Convention's coverage. Sellers and buyers are not bound to accept the 'default settings' found in the Convention, Article 6 of the Convention explicitly endorses the principle of freedom of contract: 'The parties may exclude the application of this Convention or, subject to article 12, derogate or vary the effect of any of its provisions.' Thus, parties to a sales contract are allowed to allocate obligations and risks between themselves without having to worry about whether the contract terms are consistent with the Convention. Even if the Convention is applicable to a particular contract, parties may want to exclude application of the Convention. Both parties should keep two general points in mind: (a) the exclusion should be explicit because some commentators question whether the Convention may be excluded by implication; and (b) the contract term should both exclude application of the Convention and state what law is to govern. With such complete exclusion of the application of the Convention, another designated law will govern the contract. Given the article 6 of the Convention, parties are free to enter into a sales contract with terms and conditions which are rather different from or contrary to languages of the Convention. If both parties are silent in their contract, the Convention will fill-in the gaps. This article provides various topics that need to be considered when negotiating and drafting a sales contract to be governed by the Convention. Each topic renders some alternative languages that can replace them in existing contract forms. Practitioners may want to compare their current contract forms with the suggested languages provided in this article. Some changes may be necessary.

A Comparative Study on Third-party Beneficiaries of Contracts

Yunhyo Choi(최윤효) 계명대학교 사회과학연구소 2019 한국사회과학연구 Vol.38 No.1

제3자를 위한 계약에서의 제3자는 계약의 당사자에 해당하지 않음에도 불구하고 낙약자의 채무이행에 따라 이익을 받게 되므로 요약자와 낙약자 사이의 관계에서 설정되는 수익자의 법적 지위가 쟁점이 되고 있다. 특히 우리나라에서의 논의는 제3자를 위한 계약에 기하여 수익자가 낙약자에게 직접 채무의 이행을 청구할 수 있다고한 민법 제539조 제1항과 수익자가 낙약자에게 수익의 의사표시를 한 때 그 청구권이 생긴다고 한 동조 제2항의 모순성을 중심으로 전개되고 있다. 본 연구는 수익자의 법적 지위에 대한 보호의 정도에 관하여 새로운 관점에서 입법론적 시사점을 제시하고자 우리나라와 미국의 계약법을 비교법적으로 고찰하였다. 미국은 판례법을 통해 수익자가 계약관계(privity)의 당사자는 아니지만 낙약자에 대한 관계에서 법정신탁관계(constructive trust)의 수익자에 준하여 보호를 받을 수 있도록 하고 계약당사자의 이익제공의 의사를 근거로 수익자의 직접적 이익향유를 인정하고 있다. 반면, 우리나라는 민법 제539조 제1항·제2항의 부조화에도 불구하고 요약자와 낙약자 사이의 제3자 수익의 약정과 더불어 수익자의 낙약자에 대한 수익의 의사표시를 요구하고 있다. 이는 비교법적 관점에서 수익자의 법적 지위에 대한 보호의 정도가 낮은 것으로 판단할 수 있다. 특히 계약당시 현존하지 않는 제3자를 위한 계약도 허용된다는 점을 고려할 때, 수익의 의사표시가 제3자의 권리취득 내지 이익향유의 요건이 될 수 있는지 의문이 든다. 따라서 제3자를 위한 계약이 성립과 더불어 낙약자와 수익자 사이에 법정채권관계(constructive privity)를 인정하여 수익자의 법적 지위를 확정하거나, 이 계약의 성립에 기초하여 수익자의 직접적 권리취득을 우선적으로 인정하고 수익자가 급부거절권의 행사를 통해 계약의 효과에서 자유롭게 벗어날 수 있도록 민법 제539조의 규정을 개정하는 것이 바람직하다. Although third-party beneficiaries are not in privity, they benefit from promises under contracts. Between the statuses of the contracting parties and the beneficiaries, legal issues arise both in the U.S. and Korea. Especially in Korea, a problem that the protection of the legal status of intended beneficiaries is insufficient has been propounded based on the contradictoriness of Article 539 of the Civil Code. While Korea requires a third person to manifest his or her intention of accepting benefits from a contract between contracting parties, the U.S. protects such benefits by directly concentrating on the intents of contracting parties. To suggest legislative improvements as to this matter from a new perspective, the rules on a contract for the benefit of a third party and the legal bases of the third-party beneficiary were compared under the U.S. Common law of Contracts and the Korean Civil Code. To resolve the problem of Article 539 under the Korean Civil Code, it would be reasonable to enable third-party beneficiaries to directly acquire their rights of enforcing contractual promises by admitting constructive privity between beneficiaries and promisors which could be established under Article 2 regarding the principle of Trust and Good Faith or by expressly permitting those rights under Article 539, in light of cases in the U.S. where contract beneficiaries were likened to trust beneficiaries for the purpose of protecting their legal status and benefits derived from contracts.