合約規定雙方同意新加坡法院對本案有專屬管轄權（The Parties irrevocably agree that the courts of Singapore shall have exclusive jurisdiction to settle any dispute or claim that arises out of or in connection with this Agreement or its subject matter.）
 
(一)台灣法院無管轄權：
最高法院103年度台抗字第571號民事裁判明揭其旨「訴訟當事人間..基於程序選擇權及處分權主義之原則，非不得合意由外國法院專屬管轄，以排除我國法院之審判管轄權。故當事人間就上開特定法律關係以外之涉外爭議，如明示合意為排他管轄，而選定某外國法院為專屬、排他之管轄法院者，該當事人所合意之外國管轄法院即具排他性，受選定以外之法院縱有其他一般管轄或特別管轄之原因，亦因當事人之排他合意而喪失其管轄權，僅受選定之法院得專屬、排他的行使管轄權。」
 
(二)無法先向新加坡法院法院起訴，需先向新加坡仲裁協會申請仲裁
雙方約定可適用ICC國際仲裁規定透過仲裁解決，台灣法院並無管轄權。而新加坡及韓國均為該公約聯合國紐約仲裁公約締約國(韓國在8 Feb 1973 新加坡在21 Aug 1986加入),兩國均需遵守該公約，該公約第一條明揭公約會員國對彼此間仲裁均承認其效力（Article I This Convention shall apply to the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards made in the territory of a State other than the State where the recognition and enforcement of such awards are sought）公約第2條第3項更明定凡訂有仲裁條款者若逕行向法院起訴，原則上法院應依據任何一方請求拒絕審理將訴訟移交仲裁（Article II…3. The court of a Contracting State, when seized of an action in a matter in respect of which the parties have made an agreement within the meaning of this article, shall, at the request of one of the parties, refer the parties to arbitration, unless it finds that the said agreement is null and void, inoperative or incapable of being performed. 第三條規定，各國法院對會員國之仲裁均需承認與本國仲裁有相同效力(Article III Each Contracting State shall recognize arbitral awards as binding and enforce them in accordance with the rules of procedure of the territory where the award is relied upon, under the conditions laid down in the following articles. There shall not be imposed substantially more onerous conditions or higher fees or charges on the recognition or enforcement of arbitral awards to which this Convention applies than are imposed on the recognition or enforcement of domestic arbitral awards.）得申請執行。故本案若需解決必須先赴新加坡仲裁協會申請仲裁，仲裁確定後再至韓國申請執行。

(三）若有任何一方不服，再向新加坡法院提撤銷仲裁判斷：
然撤銷仲裁判斷僅能以程序事由提起，包括仲裁人不適格等或程序顯失公平，故並不容易，仲裁判斷本身即有執行力。

作者：雙博國際法律事務所主持律師游啟忠博士  （中華民國及美國華府執業律師）