RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색
다국어 입력

http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

예시)
  • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
  • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
닫기
    인기검색어 순위 펼치기

    RISS 인기검색어

      KCI등재

      물류비 규제의 법적 쟁점에 대한 검토 = Regulatory Issues Concerning Logistics Costs

      한글로보기

      https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A100400619

      • 0

        상세조회
      • 0

        다운로드
      서지정보 열기
      • 내보내기
      • 내책장담기
      • 공유하기
      • 오류접수

      부가정보

      다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

      Recently, a fair trade issue has been raised in connection with the logistics costs. A vendor ships loads of goods to the distribution center, which stores and sorts out the goods until needed by the retail location and ships the proper quantity. It is a widespread commercial practice that the vendor is fully or partly responsible for the logistics costs from the distribution center to the retail location. Some has argued that, as it is unfair to impose the logistics cost from the distribution center to the retail location entirely or partly on the vendors, the distributor should fully pay the logistics cost from the distribution center to the retail stores. Thus, a regulatory debates regarding this matter are made among academics, practitioners and government regulators. The argument that the distributor should pay the logistics cost from the distribution center to the retail stores has no statutory ground. According to contract and commercial laws, a debtor should perform its obligation at the principal office or individual retail store of the creditor. Therefore, the present commercial practice is following the basic legal principles of contract and commercial laws. Without adoption of regulation or statute superseding the basic contractual principles, such approach should be avoided that the distributor should pay the logistics costs from its distribution center to its individual retail store. Furthermore, the distributor-should-pay approach is not economically proper. It may cause unreasonable discrimination among the vendors and undermine significantly the incentive to increase socially desirable investment by building the distribution center. Consequently, it is not supported by the legal principles and even may generate much of social inefficiencies, which will eventually lead to consumer harm. For these reasons, imposing the logistics cost on the distributor without adequate contractual interpretation should be reconsidered. Rather, the regulation on the logistics cost should be structured based on the basic legal principles of contract or commercial law and provide various measures to safeguard fairness and transparency of the contract negotiation between the vendor and distributor.
      번역하기

      Recently, a fair trade issue has been raised in connection with the logistics costs. A vendor ships loads of goods to the distribution center, which stores and sorts out the goods until needed by the retail location and ships the proper quantity. It i...

      Recently, a fair trade issue has been raised in connection with the logistics costs. A vendor ships loads of goods to the distribution center, which stores and sorts out the goods until needed by the retail location and ships the proper quantity. It is a widespread commercial practice that the vendor is fully or partly responsible for the logistics costs from the distribution center to the retail location. Some has argued that, as it is unfair to impose the logistics cost from the distribution center to the retail location entirely or partly on the vendors, the distributor should fully pay the logistics cost from the distribution center to the retail stores. Thus, a regulatory debates regarding this matter are made among academics, practitioners and government regulators. The argument that the distributor should pay the logistics cost from the distribution center to the retail stores has no statutory ground. According to contract and commercial laws, a debtor should perform its obligation at the principal office or individual retail store of the creditor. Therefore, the present commercial practice is following the basic legal principles of contract and commercial laws. Without adoption of regulation or statute superseding the basic contractual principles, such approach should be avoided that the distributor should pay the logistics costs from its distribution center to its individual retail store. Furthermore, the distributor-should-pay approach is not economically proper. It may cause unreasonable discrimination among the vendors and undermine significantly the incentive to increase socially desirable investment by building the distribution center. Consequently, it is not supported by the legal principles and even may generate much of social inefficiencies, which will eventually lead to consumer harm. For these reasons, imposing the logistics cost on the distributor without adequate contractual interpretation should be reconsidered. Rather, the regulation on the logistics cost should be structured based on the basic legal principles of contract or commercial law and provide various measures to safeguard fairness and transparency of the contract negotiation between the vendor and distributor.

      더보기

      동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

      분석정보

      View

      상세정보조회

      0

      Usage

      원문다운로드

      0

      대출신청

      0

      복사신청

      0

      EDDS신청

      0

      동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

      더보기

      주제

      연도별 연구동향

      연도별 활용동향

      연관논문

      연구자 네트워크맵

      공동연구자 (7)

      유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

      이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

      나만을 위한 추천자료

      해외이동버튼