몬트리올협약과 개정 상법상 항공화물운송인의 책임에 관한 비교연구

This paper aims to comparative on the Air Cargo Carrier of liability system under the Montreal Convention and the Korean Commercial Code. In this paper, the results of the study are presented the difference and improvement on the Korean commercial Code and Montreal Convention for the carrier’s liability in the carriage by air of cargo as follow. First, the Montreal Convention was inserting the type of cargo as the ‘destruction’, ‘loss’, ‘damage’ and ‘delay’ but the Korean Commercial Code was inserted the only as ‘loss’, ‘damage’ and ‘delay’ except the ‘destruction’. So, in the Korean Commercial Code should stipulate the ‘destruction’ for the cause of cargo loss because of specialty in the carriage by air cargo. Secondly, the carrier’s period of liability is a during the carriage by air which the goods are in charge of the carrier. In the international transportation have many uses the cause of ‘delay’, and then the Korean Commercial Code necessary should add the justice of ‘delay’ and ‘during the carriage by air’ in the Article 914. Third, they are in discord with the amounts of limited liability of the carrier as 19 SDR in the international transport or 15 SDR in the national transport. Therefore, the Korean Commercial Code should revised to accord that which it will the application for the governing law. Fourth, the Korean Commercial Code should revised to rules that in the limited liability of the carrier rule out the liability of the agents or servants of the carrier moreover carrier in the wilful conduct or reckless behavior. Fifth, the Korean Commercial Code should make a division the justice of ‘destruction’, ‘partially of loss’ and ‘partially damage’ so as to the effectiveness of notify for the complain. Sixth, the consignor’s disposition right of cargo should revised to the extinction period in which when consignee do the action of demand right of cargo delivery like the land transportation and sea transportation in the Korean Commercial Code.