미국 특혜원산지 규정 해석에 대한 연구: 국제무역재판소 판례를 중심으로

Although the rule of origin determines whether preferential tariff treatment can be allowed, all of the FTA agreements contain only a few simple and fundamental principles, leaving each country much rooms in actual implementation. Thus, origin rule is critical for the success of FTA and may become possible source of many trade disputes. This paper studies the United States s interpretation of origin rule especially with respect to ’ the Court of International Trade so as to contribute to the government s successful ’ management of origin rule. More specifically, this paper analyzes various cases involving procedural requirement, reasonable care, negligence, supporting origin document. burden of proof, product classification to draw policy implication for origin disputes. The United States, compared to European Union, treats procedural requirement as important obligation but, instead, provides immunity for those who acted on the principle of reasonable care. The obligation for reasonable care is more generous than our court s justifiable reason principle. Customs ’ office also needs to satisfy procedural requirement but court tends to disregard non-critical errors committed by Customs office. Besides, the Court of International Trade maintain different criterion on various supporting origin documents based on different origin rule. For example, it requires detailed document submission in case of value added rule. In short, the United States court tends to make autonomous judgement based on overall facts and situation including importers understanding of their obligation. Our government ’ needs to learn from the developed countries experiences to provide coherent guideline, ’ thereby preventing confusion among traders and building up the institutional trust rather than from the simple perspective of implementing customs clearance rule.