국제물품매매계약에서 구두증거배제원칙의 유효성에 관한 연구 -CISG 및 PICC를 중심으로-

The CISG has been described as one of history's most successful attempts to harmonize international commercial law. The goal of CISG provides uniformity about international sales of goods with overcoming differences between common law and civil law. This has caused some issues when courts interpret the meaning of CISG under each national law. one of issues is about whether the parol evidence rule is valid under CISG. The parol evidence rule provides that a written instrument, intended by the parties thereto as the final manifestation of their mutual understanding, cannot be challenged by past or comtemporary evidence contradicting it or modify its content. In conclusion, the parol evidence rule rejects according to Art. 8 CISG with decisions of courts in America and England. Especially, in MCC-Marble v. Ceramica Nuova D'Agostino, the court pointed out that parties wishing to avoid parol evidence problesm under Art.8 CISG may include in their contract a merger clause that exthinguishes all prior agreements and understanding not expressed in the writing. However, it is not clear whether a merger clause is enforceable under Art. 8 CISG. In Teevee Toons v. Gerhard Schubert Gmbh, the court found that Art. 8 requires an examination of all relevant facts and circumstances when deciding whether the merger clause represents the parties' intent as to an issue whether an oral agreement to disregard terms and conditions that include a merger clause supersede the written merger clause itself according to PICC.