국제물품매매계약에 관한 UN협약(CISG) 제42조에 의한 매도인과 매수인의 인식요건 = The Knowledge Requirements of the Seller and the Buyer under Article 42 of the CISG

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The rapid growth of intellectual property in international business transactions sheds a spotlight on the CISG Article 42. Compared to other articles in the CISG, it is hard to find researches and studies of the Article 42. The main point of the CISG Article 42 is that the seller is responsible only when she knew or could not have been unaware of the third party`s intellectual property rights or claims at the time of the conclusion of the sales contract. The CISG Article 42, (1) gives the knowledge requirements of specific conformity of the goods to the seller, and it also allows exemptions from them. In this respect, a careful look should be taken at the contents and the meanings of the knowledge requirements provided in the CISG Article 42. To understand what the actual knowledge and the constructive knowledge mean and imply respectively, the territoriality of intellectual property rights must be considered. It will be helpful to refer to international or domestic rules which also include knowledge requirements. According to these rules and the general rules of interpretation of the CISG, the knowledge requirements can be understood to mean that a seller actually knew or that her cognizance can be regarded in the same light as actual knowledge, even when she didn`t actually know. In conclusion, could not have been unaware means gross negligence on the whole. But more specifically, it is substantially and appreciably higher in magnitude than ordinary gross negligence, therefore, it is almost like actual knowledge, or willful misconduct. Furthermore, this knowledge requirements may draw the duty to investigate related intellectual property rights that affect goods both on a seller and on a buyer. This obligation differs in its specific contents and standards depending on the seller`s or the buyer`s individual situation. Under any circumstances, the performance of it should not be an overwhelming burden on each party to the sales contract. As a result, the critical point in applying the CISG Article 42 is whether the buyer can have reasonable expectation of receiving goods free from the third party`s intellectual property rights. Along with this, the seller`s responsibility also can be limited to the extent that she can reasonably expect or manage the contractual risk. Ultimately, the most important point in the international sale of goods is that the equilibrium must be maintained between the seller`s and the buyer`s contractual duty and responsibility.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김영석, "질적연구방법의 이해" 박영사 2012

2 "지적재산권에 관한 국제사법원칙(한일공동제안)" 한일 비교·국제지적재산법연구 (8) : 2009

3 윤선희, "지적재산권법(13정판)" 세창출판사 2012

4 특허청, "지식재산의 이해" 박문각 2012

5 송덕수, "신민법강의(제2판)" 박영사 2009

6 지원림, "민법강의(제7판)" 홍문사 2009

7 김영석, "미국법강의" 이화여자대학교 법학연구소 2003

8 김인호, "국제지식재산권 침해에 대한 보호국법의 적용과 그 한계" 대한변호사협회 (429) : 92-115, 2012

9 석광현, "국제물품매매계약의 법리" 박영사 2010

10 김인호, "국제물품매매계약에 있어서 매수인의 물품의검사기간과 부적합의 통지기간과의 관계" 법조협회 56 (56): 98-130, 2007

11 최흥섭, "국제물품매매계약에 관한 유엔협약해설" 법무부 2005

12 하삼주, "국제물품매매계약에 관한 유엔협약에서의 매수인의 물품검사 및부적합통지의 의무" 한국상사법학회 23 (23): 577-612, 2004

13 김인호, "국제물품매매계약에 관한 유엔협약 사례연구" 법무부 2004

14 오석웅, "국제물품매매계약에 관한 UN협약상 계약책임체계의 특성과 계약위반의 효과 -매도인의 의무위반에 대한 매수인의 구제권을 중심으로-" 법학연구소 23 (23): 181-206, 2007

15 한낙현, "국제거래상 신의성실의 원칙에 관한 연구- CISG를 중심으로 -" 한국무역상무학회 46 : 61-104, 2010

16 이기수, "국제거래법(제4판)" 박영사 2010

17 최준선, "국제거래법" 삼영사 2012

18 정태윤, "공동불법행위" 세창출판사 2007

19 金仁鎬, "國際物品賣買契約에 있어서 賣渡人의 默示的 品質義務" 한국비교사법학회 14 (14): 319-358, 2007

20 Christian Rauda, "Warranty for Intellectual Property Rights in the International Sale of Goods" 4 (4): 2000

21 Joseph J. Schwerha IV, "Warranties against Infringement in the Sale of Goods: a Comparison of U.C.C. § 2-312(3) and Article 42 of the U.N. Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods" 16 (16): 1995

22 John O. Honnold, "Uniform Law for International Sales under the 1980 United Nations Convention (3rd ed.)" Kluwer Law International 1999

23 UNCITRAL, "UNCITRAL Digest of case law on the United NationsConvention on the International Sale of Goods" United Nations 2012

24 Stefan Kröll, "UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG)" C.H. Beck·Hart·Nomos 2011

25 Ruth M. Janal, "The Seller's Responsibility for Third Party Intellectual Property Rights under the Vienna Sales Convention, In Sharing International Commercial Law across National Boundaries: Festschrift for Albert H. Kritzer on the Occasion of His Eightieth Birthday" Wildy, Simmonds & Hill Publishing 2008

26 Kristian Maley, "The Limits to the Conformity of Goods in the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG)" 12 : 2009

27 Eckart Gottschalk, "The Law Applicable to Intellectual Property Rights - Is the Lex Loci Protectionis a Pertinent Choice-of-Law Approach?" Conflict of Laws in a Globalized World 2007

28 Stefan Kröll, "The Burden of Proof for the Non-Conformity of Goods under Art. 35 CISG" LIX (LIX): 2011

29 Joseph Lookofsky, "Not Running Wild with the CISG" 29 (29): 2011

30 Allen M . Shinn, Jr, "Liabilities under Article 42 of the U.N. Convention on the International Sale of Goods" 2 : 1993

31 Thomas Beline, "Legal Defect Protected by Article 42 of the CISG: A Wolf in Sheep’s Clothing" 7 : 2007

32 Trevor Cook, "International Intellectual PropertyArbitration" Wolters Kluwer 2010

33 H. Allen Blair, "Hard Cases under Convention on the International Sale of Goods: A Proposed Taxonomy of Interpretative Challenges" 21 : 2011

34 Sandra Fišer-Šobot, "Duty to Examine the Goods in International Law of Sales, The Annals of the Faculty of Law in Belgrade" LIX (LIX): 2011

35 Axel Metzger, "Die Haftung des Verkäufers, für Rechtsmängel gem. Art.41, 42 CISG, In Rabels Zeitschrift für ausländisches und intenationalesPrivatrecht RabelsZ, Band 73" Mohr Siebeck 2009

36 Ingeborg Schwenzer, "Commentary on the UN Convention on International Sale of Goods (CISG) (3rd ed.)" Oxford University Press 2010

37 한재필, "CISG적용 국제물품매매에서 국내 강행법분쟁에 관한 연구- 물품불일치 분쟁사건 판례를 중심으로 -" 한국중재학회 19 (19): 147-169, 2009