儘管貿易商或銀行對信用狀的Negotiation並不陌生，UCP的條文也 一再出現Negotiation一詞，但是對信用狀當事人而言，Negotiation的意義，或不夠明確，或難以理解，與之有關的爭議和糾紛時有所聞。尤其Negotiation的概念係源自於匯票的轉讓(Negotiation)，故Negotiation L/C的種種問題往往與票據法的規定糾葛不清，造成更棘手的難題。本文首先釐清信用狀Negotiation與匯票Negotiation的差異，同時列舉各地銀行關於信用狀Negotiation的不同做法，以及各國法院對信用狀Negotiation的見解，接著探討Negotiating Bank可能面臨的風險、追索權的行使，以及 開狀銀行提出詐欺抗辯時，Negotiating Bank的權益維護等問題，最後以我國銀行界慣常辦理的「出口押匯」與Negotiation作比較，兼論出口押匯在實務上可能衍生的問題，並提出建議。

The term “Negotiation” under letters of credit is widely known in international trade and is defined and/or mentioned in various articles of the UCP. However, it often seems that bankers and other parties to letters of credit transactions do not understand the term well or consider it to be somewhat obscure, and therefore use it in the wrong sense. The concept of negotiation credit derives from the “Negotiable Instruments” under letters of credit. In many cases, it involves two branches of commercial law: the law of letters of credit and the law of negotiable instruments. Rules of these laws do not always accord with each other. The first part of this article differentiates the negotiation credit from negotiable instruments. The second part of this article examines the inconsistency of practices among negotiating banks. The third part of this article reviews different decisions in nearly same cases. The fourth part of this article gives an analysis on the risks and rights of recourse of negotiating banks, and the immunity of negotiating banks in letter of credit fraud cases. The fifth part of this article clarifies the relations among the issuing bank, the negotiating bank and the beneficiary. The sixth part of this article discusses some practical issues about negotiation credit in Taiwan. Finally, this article ends up in some suggestions.