국제물품 매매계약에서 매도인의 본질적 계약위반에 관한 연구

Abstract

In the CISG, the concept of fundamental breach of contract, which is stipulated in Article 25, is the most important regulation in that it is the standard of remedy. However, the criterion about ‘substantial loss’ which is a requirement fundamental breach of contract is abstract, which has been abruptly abstracted and has become a problem for the victim's remedy. Meanwhile, seller's major duty in the CISG must deliver a buyer product agreed with contract and documents must be issued if necessary. The most inconsistency among them is the CISG Article 35 physical suitability, and Article 35 distinguishes between cases where the specification of the goods is explicitly specified and those which are not explicitly defined. Most of the disputes arise out of disputes when the specification is not explicitly specified, so it is necessary to judge the criterion of fundamental breach of contract in order to enhance the legal stability of the CISG and the predictability of the parties. In addition, since the documents are frequently used as means for linking with the goods, hand over documents duty in Article 34 of the CISG must be additionally determined. As a result of the case study, CISG in Article 35 (2) (a) indicates the possibility of resale in the buyer's country, (b) an expression of the buyer's intentions to use for particular purpose, (c) consistency of secondary quality, and (d) product standard of packing to protect, Article 34 of the CISG determines that the documents related to the use and delivery of the goods are the basis for fundamental breach of contract. The purpose of this study is to confirm the judicial of standard by adding recent case and domestic case to Article 35 (2) (a), (b) already studied in previous studies and (c), (d), and Article 34, which were not made in the previous studies, could be used to provide assistance to the parties in future disputes in that they conducted the case analysis in relation to Article 35.