선박소유자의 FIO 약정에 따른 재용선자와 실화주에 대한 책임부담의 논거 - 대법원 2016. 9. 28. 선고 2016다213237 판결 평석 -

Until now there was a consensus that the FIO Clauses had an effect on the costs - loading or unloading costs were transferred to the shipper or to the consignee; but to go further and state that the clauses might exonerate the carrier of liability was not the prevailing interpretation. The problem is more complex in the situation where a series of sub-charters is involved. In such circumstances the normal rule would be to construe the reference as relating to the head charters, since this would be the only charter to which the shipowner, as issuer of the bill of lading, would be a party. The result might, however, be different in the case where the head charter was a time charterparty, the terms of which would generally be inappropriate to a voyage. In a voyage or time charter the charterer can direct where the ship will go but the owner of the ship retains possession of the ship through its employment of the master and crew. In a bare-boat charter, on the other hand, the owner gives possession of the ship to the charterer and the charterer hires its own master and crew. On the other hand, the documentary shipper is subject to the obligations and liabilities imposed on the shipper and is entitled to the shipper’s rights and defences under the Rotterdam Rules. These obligations, liabilities, rights and defences do not come instead of those of the shipper, but run parallel with them. This article studies the documentary shipper system in three aspects: how to be a documentary shipper; the main rights of the documentary shipper; the right to ask the carrier for transport documents when delivered the cargo; the right of control over the cargo as well as the right to sue. Through the study on these questions and with reference to the maritime laws of Korean Commercial Code and so on, it is believed that this documentary shipper system is flawed.