• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제72권
• /
• pp.25-55
• /
• 2016

The Buyer shall demand to the Builder the repayment of the pre-delivery instalments paid in case of the Builder's default under a ship-building contract. The Buyer require a refund guarantee issued by a financial institution for a security for the repayment of the pre-delivery instalments paid. As the title of a refund guarantee, in practice, is various, we should look into the contents or the expressions in a guarantee to decide whether a guarantee is a refund guarantee. A refund guarantee, a sort of independent bank guarantee, has characteristic of abstractness, and is independent from the ship-building contract. A refund guarantee is available against the beneficiary's first written demand and signed statement certifying that the Builder failed to make the refund in accordance with the ship-building contract. The guaranteed amount of a refund guarantee will be automatically increased in accordance with the Builder's receipt of the respective instalment, which is not in the other advance payment guarantee. These characteristics of a refund guarantee are derived from the expressions in a refund guarantee rather than inherent therein. This illustrates that careful attention is required to the contents and expressions of the main clauses in a refund guarantee.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제39권
• /
• pp.87-103
• /
• 2008

Two kinds of security devices such as independent guarantees and standby letters of credit have been widely used in the international transactions. These devices design to protect one of the parties from a breach by its counter-party. Main uses of these guarantees and standby letters of credit are as follows : bid guarantee, performance guarantee, advance payment guarantee, payment guarantee, retention guarantee, etc. The standby letters of credit were first invented in the U.S.A. and have been widely used in the international and domestic contracts in the U.S.A. But the practical use of these credits is very unsatisfactory in Korea. The purpose of this study is to serve the increase of practical use of the standby letters of credit in Korea through the comparison study on the practical use of the credits between Korea and the U.S.A. Both devices are very similar in function, but they are very different in forms. The one has the form of letter of credits but the other has the form of guarantee. The letter of credit has the stability of governing rule, the legal certainty, and the preference in the field of the trade community comparing to the guarantee. I recommend to use standby letter of credit instead of bank guarantee in international transactions because of the merits of the credit aforesaid.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제26권
• /
• pp.203-223
• /
• 2005

Many international transactions involve the use of security devices, commonly referred to as "guarantees", "bonds", or "standby credits", designed to protect one of the parties from a breach by its counter-party. These security mechanisms may be provided by banks, insurance companies, specialized surety companies, or other financial service firms. Although some legal systems distinguish between "guarantees", "bonds", and "indemnities", these terms are often used as synonyms in the everyday language of international traders. It may therefore be necessary to examine the particular characteristics and nature of the guarantee obligation in order to properly classify the guarantee. Two main categories of guarantee are demand and suretyship. Under a demand guarantee, the guarantor must pay on first demand by the beneficiary. The beneficiary only has to demand payment under the guarantee - there is no need to prove that the principal has actually defaulted on a contractual obligation. Under a suretyship or conditional guarantee, the obligation of the guarantor is triggered by the actual default or contractual breach of the principal, as evidenced in a document such as a court judgement or arbitral award against the principal. Guarantees have been widely used in the international business transactions. Main uses of guarantees are as follows : Performance Bonds/Guarantees, Bid(or Tender) Bonds/Guarantees, Advance Payment or Repayment Bonds/Guarantees, Retention Bonds/Guarantees, Maintenance(or Warranty) Bonds/Guarantees etc.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제42권
• /
• pp.133-160
• /
• 2009

In International trade the buyer and seller are normally separated from on another not only by distance but also by differences in language and culture. It is rarely possible for the performance of obligations to be simultaneous and the performance of contracts therefore calls for trust in a situation in which the parties are unlikely to feel able to trust each other unless they have a longstanding and successful relationship. Thus the seller under an international contract of sale will not wish to surrender documents of title to goods to the buyer until he has at least an assurance of payment, and no buyer will wish to pay for goods until he has received them. A gap of distrust thus exists which is often bridged by the undertaking of an intermediary known and trusted by both parties who will undertake on his own liability to pay the seller the contract price in return for the documents of title and then pass the documents to the buyer in return for the reimbursement. This is a common explanation of the theory behind the documentary letter of credit in which the undertaking of a bank of international repute serves as a "guarantee" to each party that the other will perform his obligations. The independence principle, also referred to as the "autonomy principle", is at the core of letter of credit or bank guarantee law. This principle provides that the letter of credit or bank guarantee is independent of the underlying contractual commitment - that is, the transaction that the credit is intented to secure - between the applicant and the beneficiary ; the credit is also independent of the relationship between the bank and its customer, the applicant. The most important exception to the independence principle is the doctrine of fraud in the transaction. A strict interpretation of the rule that the guarantee is independent of the underlying transaction would lead to the conclusion that neither fraud nor manifest abuse of rights by the beneficiary would constitute an objection to payment. There is one major problem related to "Independent guarantees", namely abusive or unfair callings. The beneficiary may make an unfair calling under the guarantee. The countermeasure of beneficiary's unfair calling divided three cases. First, advance countermeasure namely by contract. In other words, when the formation of the contract, the parties must insert the Force Majeure Clause, Arbitration Clause to Contract, and clear statement to the condition for demand calling. Second, post countermeasure namely by court. Many countries, including the United States, authorize the courts to grant an order enjoining the issuer from paying or enjoining the beneficiary from receiving payment under the guaranty letter. Third, Export Insurance. For example, the Export Credit Guarantees Department is prepared, subject to certain conditions, to cover the risk of unfair calling. Of course, KEIC in Korea is cover the risk of the all things for guarantees. On international projects, contractor performance is usually guaranteed by either a standby letters of credit or Independent guarantee. These instruments will be care the parties.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제58권
• /
• pp.215-236
• /
• 2013

It is quite true that the more Korean contractors receive overseas contracts, the more they need guarantees. The top market for them is the Middle East countries, consisting of more than the half of the total amount awarded last year and the trend is increasing as well. The problem, however, is that employers in these countries are reluctant to use international rules for guarantee such as URDG or ISP98 and easily make unfair callings. However, Korean contractors(applicants), especially small and medium sized enterprises(SMEs) tend to hurriedly enter a contract without looking into its contents as well as guarantees. They do not realize the importance of the guarantees until they receive callings from the employers(beneficiaries). Being independent from the underlying contracts, guarantee is the equivalent to cash in that it usually does not require any proof of demand when calling and the guarantor should make a payment within usually 5 business days after the request. It is often observed these days that several Korean SMEs go bankrupt due to liquidity risks after receiving unfair callings from employers in the Middle East countries. In retrospect, some cases could be obviated if contractors were a little more careful in checking the contents of a guarantee at the time of concluding a contract. For example, there is one case where the underlying contract includes a reduction clause in the Advance Payment bond and the guarantee does not have that clause. In the end, the Korean contractor had to take the whole burden of the bond amount though it had finished 81% of the project. Nobody could argue that contractors should take a full responsibility if they fail in their obligations. However, the employer's wrongful callings need to be prevented in the first place, if possible. As there shouldn't be a case where one party is at a disadvantage against the other like the case mentioned above, useful insight is being sought to minimize unfair calling risks for the benefit of the applicant. First, the applicant should carefully look into every detail of the potential guarantee before signing a contract, heeding especially that there is a reduction clause in the AP bond. Second, the governing principles for guarantee should be the ones that are internally used such as URDG758 that is objective in terms of callings given that, for example, it specifies that the requirement for a supporting statement when making a demand is a default rule. It is also recommended that the form of guarantees be the standard demand guarantee. Third, parties involved in issuing guarantees are advised to understand international rules for guarantee like URDG758 and ISP98 and to play a key role in guiding SME contractors in Korea so that they can protect themselves from possible wrongful callings, particularly from employers in the Middle East countries. I hope this study would give a wake-up call for Korean SMEs wishing to do business in the Middle East countries and remind them of the importance of guarantee itself and its governing principles.

• 정보보호학회논문지
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.69-80
• /
• 2003

확인 가능한 암호화 기법(verifiable encryption)은 암호문을 해독하지 못해도 어떤 것이 암호화되어 있는지 확인할 수 있는 기법이다. 이 기법은 공정한 교환(fair exchange)에서 암호화된 물건을 먼저 상대방에게 제시하여 상대방이 그것을 받을 수 있다는 확신을 갖도록 하는데 사용된다. 그러나 지금까지의 공정한 교환은 참여자의 익명성을 고려하지 않았다. 이 논문에서는 표현문제(representation problem)를 사용하는 익명의 화폐시스템에 이러한 확인 가능한 암호화 기법을 적용하여, 지불의 원자성을 제공하는 방법을 제안한다. 이 방법은 기존의 방법과는 달리 분쟁을 해결할 때 신뢰기관이 은행으로부터 상점의 입금여부를 확인할 필요가 없어서 효율적이다. 또한 상점의 입금시한이 없으며, 고객과 상점 모두 시간적인 제약 없이 분쟁해결을 요청할 수 있는 유연한 방식이다. 반면에 지불과정에서 확인 가능한 암호화를 적용하기 위한 증명이 요구되므로 추가비용이 들어간다. 새 시스템의 안전성과 기존의 원자성 보장 방법과의 비교분석도 논의한다.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제14권1호
• /
• pp.345-366
• /
• 2012

팩토링(factoring)의 역사는 중세시대까지 거슬러 올라갈 수 있지만 현대적 팩토링은 식민지시절 미국에서 시작되어 1960년대 영국으로 전파되면서 오늘날 유럽에서 가장 발전된 모습을 보이고 있다. 영국의 팩토링은 격지거래의 불확실성과 불편함을 해소하고자 판매지에서 상업대리인(mercantile agent)의 역할을 수행하기 위해 시작되어 점차 금융기능에 초점을 맞춘 오늘날의 팩토링 구조로 발전하였다. 미국에서의 팩토링 또한 상업대리인 형태로 출발하였으며 이후 팩터들의 활동이 수탁판매와 지급보증 뿐 아니라 선급금융 서비스로 확대되는 과정을 거쳐 왔다. 영미의 팩토링산업은 오늘날 전문팩터와 은행팩터, 두 유형의 기관들에 의해 운영되고 있고 특히 중소기업금융에 특화되어 있다. 이는 상대적으로 열악한 재무구조와 채무관리능력을 지닌 중소기업들에 대해 민간 최종대부자의 역할을 팩터가 수행함을 의미하는 한편 팩터에게는 충분한 신용조사능력이 요구됨을 의미한다. 우리나라 수출자의 수출 결제조건이 지속적으로 불리해져 결제리스크 관리와 무역금융의 보완 수단이 필요한 상황에서 팩토링의 활성화는 시급하며 중요하다. 우리나라 중소 수출기업들이 수출팩토링을 적극 활용할 수 있도록 시중은행은 신용조사역량을 확보해야 하는 한편 정부는 팩토링이 활성화될 수 있도록 정책적 노력을 기울여야 할 것이다.

• 헤리티지:역사와 과학
• /
• 제49권3호
• /
• pp.224-239
• /
• 2016

매장문화재의 가치를 유지시키면서 개발과의 조화를 지속가능하게 하려는 관점에서 현재의 매장문화재발굴제도의 문제점을 살펴보고 그 대안을 찾아보는 것이 이 논문의 목적이다. 순수공공재이면서 제한된 문화자원이라고 할 수 있는 매장문화재의 가치를 지속가능하게 보호하고 개발과의 조화를 이루게 하려면 발굴법인과의 발굴계약을 통해 개발자에게 직접 발굴비용을 부담하게 하는 현행제도를 바꾸는 것이 필요하다. 순수공공재인 매장문화재를 그 동안 시장의 원리에 맡겨 조사해왔는데 시장실패양상을 보여줌으로 적극적인 정부의 개입이 필요하게 되었다. 그 방식이 매장문화재부담금제도의 도입이다. 발굴법인과 개발자의 직접적 접촉을 방지하고 문화재청의 관리 속에서 매장문화재부담금으로 확보된 재원으로 매장문화재의 발굴이 진행되게 되면 저가수주, 발굴의 질 하락, 민원과 사회적 갈등과 같은 매장문화재 발굴과 관련된 많은 문제가 사전에 해결될 것이기 때문이다. 매장문화재부담금제도의 도입을 통해 매장문화재발굴제도와 보호제도를 개선하면서 민원을 사전적으로 크게 줄이기 위해서는 민원의 폭탄이 되는 '발굴보존문화재 존치구역에 대한 토지매입예산'이 확보되어야 한다. 이것이 가능하도록 기획재정부는 문화재청에 예산을 배정해 주어야 한다. 소규모국비발굴예산의 대폭확충을 통한 개별민원의 감소도 모색되어야 한다. 매장문화재의 발굴과 보존이 제대로 이루어지고 매장문화재에 대해 민원을 가진 주민이 줄어들 수 있도록 정부는 그 토대를 놓아주어야 한다. 이와 더불어 저가 입찰, 부실 발굴 등에 대한 발굴법인의 자정(自淨)노력도 이루어져야 하고 우수한 발굴조사인력의 이직방지와 양성을 위한 임금체계와 근로신분체계의 제도보완이 요망된다.