유럽공통매매법안에서의 매도인의 추완권에 관한 연구

A Study on the Seller's Right to Cure in the Common European Sales Law

I have studied on the seller's right to cure in the Common European Sales Law. It’s implications can be summarized as follows. If the seller can offer the cure easily, it is rational to give the right to cure to the seller. I think that the contents of regulations on ‘the seller's right to cure within the time allowed for performance’ in CESL is natural in contents, so that the introduction of that regulations is not needed. CESL requires the notification of the lack of conformity from buyer to seller without undue delay. However, if the buyer is a consumer, the requirement of examination and notification is not applied to this rule. In case that the Korean Civil Law introduce the seller's right to cure, we should not ask the buyer’s notification as a requisite for the seller's right to cure. On the other hand, if the requirements for the seller's right to cure are met, the seller should offer to cure it at his own expense, and should notify the method of cure and also the period of cure without undue delay. We need to introduce the clause : “In case that the offer to cure burdens the buyer with significant inconvenience or the cure would be inappropriate in the circumstances, such a situation entitles the buyer to refuse the offer to cure”, “Notwithstanding cure, the buyer retains the ight to claim damages for delay as well as for any harm caused or not prevented by the cure.”, and the clause : “The seller has a reasonable period of time to effect cure.” And both the introduction of the clause : “The buyer may withhold performance pending cure, but the rights of the buyer which are inconsistent with allowing the seller a period of time to effect cure are suspended until that period has expired.”, and the introduction of the clause : “The right to cure is not precluded by notice of termination.”, are also appropriate to the Korean civil law.