복합운송주선업자의 법적 책임 - 화물이 불법인도된 경우를 중심으로 -

A freight forwarder arranges various works, as an intermediary for cargo interests, such as taking cargo from shippers, putting the cargo into a warehouse and taking the same out of the warehouse, shipping the cargo, carrying the cargo, buying insurance, keeping the cargo, and delivering the cargo etc. In some cases, the freight forwarder itself enters into a carriage contract and acts as a multimodal carrier. Thus, a freight forwarder plays an important role in the modern international carriage of goods. However, the rules regulating a freight forwarder is not well organized in our legal system. Recently, the Korean Commercial Code was amended so that one article relating to a multimodal carrier was included in the Korean Commercial Code. However, it is not sufficient to deal with the legal issues involving a freight forwarder. Therefore, there is little alternative but to apply the general principles of the Civil Code and Commercial Codes to the above legal issues, after the legal nature of the issues involving a freight forwarder have been carefully reviewed and classified on a case by case basis. The liability of a freight forwarder for a mis-delivery of cargo will be discussed below in light of the foregoing. In a case where a freight forwarder, who was entrusted by an importer for the arrangement of carriage of imported goods, mis-delivered cargo in Korea, based on the lower court precedent, the writer is of the opinion that the freight forwarder mis-delivered the cargo as an agent for a partner freight forwarder located in the export country and thus the freight forwarder is not liable in contract, but is liable in tort, as the case may be. Nextly, in a case where a freight forwarder puts cargo into a bonded warehouse as an agent for the partner freight forwarder located in the export country and the bonded warehouse mis-delivered the cargo without involvement of the freight forwarder, based on the Supreme Court precedents, the writer opines that the freight forwarder is not liable in tort (vicarious liability). Lastly, in a case where a freight forwarder acted as a carrier and the agent for the freight forwarder mis-delivered cargo, there is no question about the fact that the freight forwarder is liable in contract. However, if the above agent put the cargo into a bonded warehouse and the bonded warehouse mis-delivered the cargo without involvement of the agent, the freight forwarder should be liable in contract, while it is not liable in tort (vicarious liability). However, the Supreme Court held, in a case similar to the above, the freight forwarder (the carrier) is not liable in contract, as well. The writer believes that the above holding of the Supreme Court is not correct and should be rectified.