• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.46
• /
• pp.159-177
• /
• 2010

This work intends to study some problems in relation to the issuance of letters of credit. Those problems are the delay of issuing letters of credit, the reissuing letters of credit, and the issuing letters of credit in the third party's name. Sellers and buyers must keep in mind that the supply of letter of credit by buyer is the condition precedent for a seller's shipment obligation. A seller has no obligation to ship the goods until he receives the letter of credit by buyer's bank, issuing bank. An issuing bank can have the risk that an original letter of credit and a reissued letter of credit can be used double in the exporting country. The most safe method for issuing bank is to cancel the original letter of credit and to reissue a new letter of credit. When an issuing bank issues a letter of credit in the third party's name, the bank should investigate the background of the transaction and give the buyer a proper line of credit.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.50
• /
• pp.89-108
• /
• 2011

This work intends to study some issues in relation to the cancellation and amendment of letter of credit. Those issues in relation to the cancellation are the significance and formation time of cancellation of letter of credit and some points for practical attention of UCP 600 in the case of cancellation of letter of credit. Those issues in relation to the amendment are the significance and formation requirements of amendment of letter of credit and some points for practical attention of UCP 600 in the case of amendment of letter of credit. If exporters receive letters of credit from foreign countries, they must confirm the indication of irrevocable letter of credit. When they find revocable letters of credit, they should amend the credits to be irrevocable credits. If issuing banks amend letters of credit against beneficiaries, the banks should receive the beneficiaries' consent. If amendments devalue applicants' expectations in the underlying transaction, the applicants for whom the credit issues are not liable to reimburse. Beneficiaries and issuing banks may amend a credit, but the issuing bank acts at its own peril if it does not obtain the applicant's consent.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.22
• /
• pp.137-171
• /
• 2004

Under Article 2 of the Uniform Customs and Practice for Documentary Credits (1993 Revision. UCP), letter of credit means an arrangement whereby an issuing bank is to make a payment to a beneficiary, or is to accept and pay bills of exchange drawn by the beneficiary, or authorises another bank to effect such payment, or to accept and pay such bills of exchange, or to negotiate, against stipulated document(s), provided that the terms and conditions of the letter of credit are complied with. In letter of credit operations, all parties concerned deal with documents, and not with goods, services and/or other performances to which the documents may relate (UCP, Article 4). It is important to note that under UCP, if a letter of credit contains conditions without stating the document(s) to be presented in compliance therewith, banks will deem such conditions as not stated and will disregard them (Article 13 c). Section 5-108(g) of the Uniform Commercial Code also contains a similar provision. However on several occasions the Korean Supreme Court held that non-documentary conditions in letter of credit governed by UCP could be regarded as valid, although they were not desirable in the context of letter of credit transactions. The rationale underlying the decisions was that parties to the letter of credit transactions are free to determine the terms and conditions of the relevant letter of credit. After reviewing the relevant provisions of UCP, UCC, the International Standby Practices (ISP98) and the Supreme Court decisions of Korea, the author suggests that we classify conditions that do not require any documents (so called apparent non-documentary conditions) into two categories and treat them differently. There are apparent non-documentary conditions that are consistent with the nature of letter of credit and those which are inconsistent with the nature of letter of credit. In the first category there are two sub-categories, (i) those which are valid and (ii) those which are invalid and thus should be disregarded. In the second category there are two sub-categories, (i) those which are invalid and thus should be disregarded and (ii) those which are valid but deprive the instrument of the nature as letter of credit.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.213-238
• /
• 2006

Deferred payment letter of credit is the L/C that makes the issuing bank to pay a beneficiary at maturity stipulated in the credit. In this deferred payment letter of credit transaction, is it possible that a confirming or nominating bank payor negotiate before maturity? and the confirming or nominating bank have legal protection when paid or negotiated before maturity? These problems are raised in argument. By the way, Korea, Switzerland, Germany, and Italy are positive on the above question, but France, United Kingdom, and Singapore are negative. Therefore, when using deferred payment letter of credit, it is required to keep in mind that the understanding of maturity stipulated in the credit is different among countries, legal principles of each nations, and researchers. And other problems are raised also as follows; the application of Fraud Rule and principle of independence and abstraction as nature of credit, when to pay credit amount to beneficiary, and refusal of payment due to poor quality. Finally, it is required to use deferred payment letter of credit, after full understanding of deferred payment letter of credit pointed out in this paper.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.76
• /
• pp.103-123
• /
• 2017

If additional condition in letter of credit is used in malicious way, it affects the international trade transaction in jeopardy. Therefore, it's significant to identify whether additional conditions are malicious or ordinary in the transaction with letter of credit. In normal cases, thanks to lots of useful features as an international payment method, such as security of payment, legal protection, and versatility, a letter of credit is widely used in international trade. However, even with these advantageous features, a letter of credit is complicate and costly to use, compared to other payment methods. Furthermore, due to its principle of independence from underlying contract, a use of letter of credit creates another type of concern for proper handling and needs significant caution upon field use. At some points, malicious additional conditions are used for buyer's advantage in deal making and fraud instance in worst situation. In addition, some countries request malicious conditions against sellers as a non-tariff barrier. Therefore it's extremely important to recognize whether malicious additional condition exists in letter of credit and, if so, how to deal with it. This study delivers the information to distinguish and categorize the malicious conditions in various cases and to figure out how to deal with them for safer trade with less risk.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.53
• /
• pp.75-97
• /
• 2012

This study primarily concerns the transfer of letter of credit. A transferable credit is a credit that clearly specifies it is 'transferable' and may be made available in whole or in part to second beneficiary by the request of the first beneficiary. the transfer of the credit is available where the seller as a middleman in intermediate trades purchases from domestic and international supplier. The purpose of this study is to examine the transfer of letter of credit in the UCP600. Having recognized the differences, the study analyzes the transfer of letter of credit under the UCP600 in comparison to those under the ISP98. The ISP98, like the UCP600, stipulates for the requirement of transfer, the number of transfer, conditions of transfer, the replacement of the name of first beneficiary.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.48 no.3
• /
• pp.23-41
• /
• 2023

The seller and the buyer write down the agreed details in the trade contract as trade contract clauses. In the case where a letter of credit is agreed to be the payment condition, the buyer shall open a letter of credit to the seller with the shipping date specified in the trade contract through its bank. In this case, the legal relationship between the performance date of the trade contract and the shipment date of the letter of credit, the change of the performance date of the trade contract due to the change of the trade contract and the change of the shipment date specified in the letter of credit, the seller's letter of credit A problem arises in the legal interpretation of the approval period and the change request period. Therefore, this paper analyzed the precedents of the Seongnam Branch of the Suwon District Court and the Seoul High Court related to these legal issues. The performance date of a trade contract is the seller's delivery date and the buyer's payment date. In the letter of credit transaction, the date of performance of the trade contract is regarded as the date of shipment and the date of negotiation of documents specified in the letter of credit. The seller must decide whether to accept the letter of credit within 5 banking days after receiving the letter of credit from the buyer. After this period has elapsed, the seller cannot refuse the letter of credit. However, if the buyer is unable to decide whether to accept the letter of credit within 5 banking days due to reasons attributable to the buyer, the delivery date specified in the letter of credit will be extended. If the seller requests an amendment to the letter of credit, the buyer must accept it and open the letter of credit the seller desires to the seller. If the buyer refuses the seller's request to change the letter of credit, company A has the obligation to change and reopen the letter of credit as requested by company B. Expect by agreeing on the quotation As it is a fundamental breach of contract stipulated in Article 25 of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, company B can cancel the trade contract and claim damages from company A. Compensation for damages caused by Company A's breach of the trade contract shall be an amount equal to the loss suffered by Company B as a result of the breach, including loss of profits.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.429-455
• /
• 2013

This paper investigates the extent and scope of electronization of Letter of Credit and examines the obstacles in the course of electronization of Letter of Credit. For this purpose, this paper adopts two track methodologies. First, we study the electronization of Letter of Credit in the macro perspective. It means that we analyze the scope and the extent of electronization of electronic Letter of Credit in the national economy as a whole. Second, we utilize the case study approach to examine the electronization of Letter of Credit in micro perspective. In other words we examine individual commercial banks in Korea. For this purpose, we analyze the data from two commercial banks out of four largest domestic banks in Korea. For example, we select two commercial banks in Korea and ask current status of electronization of Letter of Credit, i.e, the utilization of EDI L/C, e-L/C, and e-B/L. A major finding of our study is that the extent of electronization is not negligible in micro perspective as well as in macro perspective. In micro perspective, two commercial banks utilize EDI letter of credit in a critical sense. On the other hand, they seldom uses e-L/C and e-B/L in international transaction. This study shows that major bottlenecks for the electronization of Letter of Credit are pessimistic perception of SME entrepreneurs toward the electronization of Letter of Credit and the high costs of system building. We conclude that unlike superficial perception, there is a considerable progress toward the electronization of Letter of Credit in micro perspective.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.51
• /
• pp.187-210
• /
• 2011

International transactions have the threat of non-payment by the buyer or non-performance by the seller. Parties tend to search for additional means of securing performance and payment beyond the mere agreement in the contract. Such security may be achieved by means of a letter of credit. When contracting parties have agreed to pay by means of a letter of credit, the buyer's bank takes upon itself the obligation to pay the purchase price when the seller tenders the documents that are stipulated in the letter of credit. The documents must comply strictly with the terms of the credit.. The documents play a crucial role in letter of credit transaction. The principles of abstraction, separability and strict compliance governing the letter of credit transaction are considered. The concept of fundamental breach of Article 25 CISG was discussed. This article examines whether a failure to deliver documents conforming to the terms of the letter of credit can constitute a fundamental breach of the sales contract as defined by Article 25 of the CISG by the seller and thereby enable the buyer to avoid the contract. For letter of credit transactions it should be accepted that the delivery of non-performing documents constitutes a fundamental breach, if the result of this breach is that the bank refuses to pay the price for the goods. On the other hand, in the interpretation of Article 25 CISG, it should be noted that if the parties have agreed to payment by means of a letter of credit, they have simultaneously agreed to apply the strict compliance principle to the delivery of documents in the sales contract. Finally the parties should ensure that inconsistency between the requirements under the documentary credit and the requirements under the contract of sale is avoided, since the buyer may be in breach of his payment obligation if the seller cannot get paid under the documentary credit when his documents conform with the contract of sale.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.42
• /
• pp.109-132
• /
• 2009

The purpose of the introduction of this article is as follows. It was frequent to put a condition on the letter of credit without stating corresponding document. But these attempts are very dangerous to the letter of credit operation. That is, if these types of conditions would be permitted in letter of credit, the independence principle must be collapsed. So these conditions must be disregarded in order to safeguard the independence principle. It is why UCP600 article 14(h) writes that if a Credit contains a condition without stating the document(s) to be presented in compliance therewith, banks will deem such conditions as not stated and will disregard it. But scope of this article 14 should not be limited by the conditions which do not state the document to be presented in compliance therewith. That is, the purpose of this article is to preserve the independence principle, so, if it is impossible to ascertain satisfaction with a condition, it should be disregarded as the non-documentary condition, even if the condition is included in the letter of credit together with document to be presented. Conclusively, whether or not a condition would be regarded as the non documentary condition depends on whether compliance of such condition is ascertained by presented documents stipulated in the letter of credit.