The United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG) has been a comparatively successful treaty internationally since it was established in 1980. Based on the trend of intergration of the international trade oreder, along with the UNIDROIT Principles of International Commercial Contract(PICC) and the Principles of European Contracts Law(PECL) it also has a direct or indirect impact on domestic law. In fact, the fact that the CISG, PICC, PECL texts were very helpful in the 2004 and 2013 Korean Civil Code Amendment Proposals is of great significant. Recently, it was recognized that the system and content of CISG’s breach of contract had many influences even in the process of amending Japanese civil law, and actively reflected these international trends.
Therefore, in this paper, I will look at how Japanese civil law, which had the same contents of contract termination discipline as Korean civil law, changed under the influence of CISG. In particular, this paper analyze the impact of legislation and the consequences of legislation, accepting the notion of material defaults in termination. Specifically, the discussion will focus on the following two issues. First, the amended law of Japan reconsidered the essence of the termination system, and as a result, eliminated negligence from the requirements for termination, as in CISG. Instead, the revised Japanese law introduced the concept of fundamental non-performance as a termination requirement. Secondly, in the case of force majeur, it is necessary to reset the relationship between the termination system and the risk-taking system for the deletion of the negligence requirement.
On the other hand, the revised law of Japan established the risk system as a veto right like the Anglo-American law. As a result, the distinction between contract termination and the risk system is given, and the two systems are allowed to coexist. This has a different attitude from the CISG and is significant in that it constitutes a very unique legislation in the view of comparative law.
In conclusion, the attitude of Japan’s revised civil law is very much on the issue of resolving issues of consistency with existing domestic legal systems, while accepting new paradigms derived from international legislation such as CISG. This paper examines the significant points in the discussion of Korean Civil Law revision by comparing the Japanese revised law with CIGS.