• Title/Summary/Keyword: 강행규범

Search Result 6, Processing Time 0.017 seconds

A Legal Study on the International Trade of stolen/lost artworks: Focused on Illegal trafficking of cultural property (점유이탈 예술품의 국제거래에 관한 법적 연구 - 문화재를 중심으로 -)

  • Jung, Seungwoo
    • Korean Association of Arts Management
    • /
    • no.51
    • /
    • pp.191-219
    • /
    • 2019
  • Adoption of applicable law for the international trade of artworks is closely related to the results of lawsuits. Recently, starting with New York, the hub of the international artworks market, a modern, mixed-law is gradually being adopted more. It is difficult to designate an applicable law of an international trade of artworks through private laws regulations of relevant countries, and the public laws regulations must also be considered in relation to individual benefits and the public benefits to the relevant countries. With regards to the foreign relations issues, Korea's private international law embraces a so-called public order theory, and according to the Section 7 of the Act on the Private International Law and its enactment history, the compulsory provision, which seems appropriate for application to the corresponding matter, applies without regards to the selection of the applicable law. The Civil Act of Korea acknowledges bona fide acquisition of a cultural asset, in principle, if the Cultural Heritage Protection Act is not applicable. Moreover, a lost artwork is also a subject of bona fide acquisition; however, if the relevant artwork is either stolen or lost, the original owner has the right to demand the return of that artwork within 2 years of being stolen or lost according to the Section 250 of the Civil Act. Also, if the buyer purchased from a distributor specializing in the artworks, such as auction, open market or gallery, the buyer could request a compensation of the purchase price from the original owner, and if the buyer purchased through a private transaction, the buyer cannot demand a compensation of the purchase price and must return the artwork.

A Study on the Meaning of Outer Space Treaty in International Law (우주조약의 국제법적 의미에 관한 연구)

  • Kim, Han-Taek
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.28 no.2
    • /
    • pp.223-258
    • /
    • 2013
  • 1967 Outer Space Treaty(Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies; OST) is a treaty that forms the basis of international space law. OST is based on the 1963 Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space announced by UNGA resolution. As of May 2013, 102 countries are states parties to OST, while another 27 have signed the treaty but have not completed ratification. OST explicitly claimed that the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies are the province of all mankind. Art. II of OST states that "outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means", thereby establishing res extra commercium in outer space like high seas. However 1979 Moon Agreement stipulates that "the moon and its natural resources are the Common Heritage of Mankind(CHM)." Because of the number of the parties to the Moon Agreement(13 parties) it does not affect OST. OST also established its specific treaties as a complementary means such as 1968 Rescue Agreement, 1972 Liability Convention, 1975 Registration Convention. OST bars states party to the treaty from placing nuclear weapons or any other weapons of mass destruction in orbit of Earth, installing them on the Moon or any other celestial body, or to otherwise station them in outer space. It exclusively limits the use of the Moon and other celestial bodies to peaceful purposes and expressly prohibits their use for testing weapons of any kind, conducting military maneuvers, or establishing military bases, installations, and fortifications. However OST does not prohibit the placement of conventional weapons in orbit. China and Russia submitted Draft Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapon in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects(PPWT) on the Conference on Disarmament in 2008. USA disregarded PPWT on the ground that there are no arms race in outer space. OST does not have some articles in relation to current problems such as space debris, mechanisms of the settlement of dispute arising from state activities in outer space in specific way. COPUOS established "UN Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" based on "IADC Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines" and ILA proposed "International Instrument on the Protection of the Environment from Damage Caused by Space Debris" for space debris problems and Permanent Court of Arbitration(PCA) established "Optional Rules for Arbitration of Disputes Relating to Outer Space Activities" and ILA proposed "1998 Taipei Draft Convention on the Settlement of Space Law Dispute" for the settlement of dispute problems. Although OST has shortcomings in some articles, it is very meaningful in international law in considering the establishment of basic principles governing the activities of States in the exploration and use of outer space, including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies. OST established the principles governing the activities of states in the exploration and use of outer space as customary law and jus cogens in international law as follows; the exploration and use of outer space shall be carried out for the benefit and in the interests of all countries and shall be the province of all mankind; outer space shall be free for exploration and use by all States; outer space is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. The principles of global public interest in outer space imposes international obligations erga omnes applicable to all States. This principles find significant support in legal norms dealing with following points: space activities as the "province of all mankind"; obligation to cooperate; astronauts as envoys of mankind; avoidance of harmful contamination; space activities by States, private entities and intergovernmental organisations; absolute liability for damage cauesd by certain space objects; prohibition of weapons in space and militarization of the celestial bodies; duty of openness and transparency; universal application of the international space regime.

  • PDF

Principles of Space Resources Exploitation under International Law (국제법상 우주자원개발원칙)

  • Kim, Han-Teak
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.33 no.2
    • /
    • pp.35-59
    • /
    • 2018
  • Professor Bin Cheng said that outer space was res extra commercium, while the moon and the other celestial bodies were res nullius before the 1967 Outer Space Treaty(OST). However, Article 2 of the OST made the moon and other celestial bodies have the legal status as res extra commmercium, not appropriated by any country or private enterprises or individual person, but the resources there can be freely available, as those on the high seas. The non-appropriation principle was introduced to corpus juris spatialis internationalis. Whether or not the non-appropriation principle is binding for the non-parties of the OST, many scholars see this principle as an international customary law, even developing into jus cogens. Article 11(2) of the Moon Agreement(MA) reconfirms the nonappropriation principle of Article 2 of the OST, but it has much less effect than the OST because the MA binds only the 18 parties involved. The MA applies only to the moon and celestial bodies other than the Earth in the Solar System, the OST's application scope extends to the Galaxy because the OST has no such substantive enactment. As referred to in the 2015 CSLCA of USA or Luxembourg's Law of Space Resources, allowing individuals and enterprises run by other countries to commercially explore and utilize the space resources, the question may arise whether this violates the non-appropriation principle under Article 2 of the OST and Article 11 of the MA. In the case of the CSLCA, the law explicitly specifies that sovereignty, possessory rights, and judiciary rights to a specific celestial body cannot be claimed, let alone ownership. This author believes that this law respects the legal status of outer space and the celestial bodies as res extra commmercium. As long as any countries or private enterprises or individuals respect the non-appropriation principle of outer space and the celestial bodies, they could use, exploit it. Another question might be raised in the difference between res extra commercium on the high seas and res extra commercium in outer space and the celestial bodies. Collecting resources on the high seas and exploiting space resources should be interpreted differently. On the high seas, resources can be collected without any obstacles like fishing, whereas, in the case of the deep sea-bed area, the Common Heritage of Mankind principles under the UNCLOS should be operated by the International Seabed Authority as an international regime. The nature or form of the sea resources found on the high seas are thus different from that of space resources, which are fixed on the moon and the celestial bodies without water. Thus, if individuals or private enterprises collect these resources from outer space and the celestial bodies, they might secure a certain section and continue collecting or mining works without any limitation. If an American enterprise receives an approval from the U.S. government, secures the best location and collects resources on the moon, can other countries' enterprises access to this area? How large the exploiting place can be allotted on the moon? How long should such a exploiting activity be lasted? Under the current international space law, these matters might be handled according to the principle of "first come, first served." As a consequence, the international community should provide a guideline or a proposal for the settlement of any foreseeable disputes during the space activity to solve plausible space legal questions in the near future.

A Study on central army in the early Joseon Dynasty (조선(朝鮮) 건국 초 중앙군(中央軍)연구)

  • Park, Hui Seong
    • Convergence Security Journal
    • /
    • v.14 no.6_1
    • /
    • pp.89-98
    • /
    • 2014
  • Simultaneously with the founding of the Joseon military system was reformed. On the basis of Koryo's '2gun 6wie(二軍 六衛)' reorganized into '10wie 50ryong(10衛 50領)'. But the de facto central military power was in Euhungqingunwie(義興親軍衛) that is Lee Seong-gye's Elite Guard. In addition to these make up the backbone of the central forces that were Siwiepae(侍衛牌). Also a anti-legislation Seongzhongaima(成衆愛馬) was also presented. But soon the military command and military systems will start to repair. First, reform of military command system of the unified command system shall be established for the Euhungqingunwie(義興親軍衛). And Jeongdojeon has strengthened the military education and training. But, for the establishment of Military command system the most important was the reform of the private soldier. Military systems also have been systematized. shipwie(十衛) was changed to the shipsa(十司) in Taejo. After, they are expanded to shipyisa(十二司) in Sejong. And, the Gabsa(甲士) were returned. In addition, various special branch of the army, Byelsiwie(別侍衛), Naegumewie(內禁衛), gyumsabok(兼司僕) etc, are increased and founded.

[Retracted] A Study on the Export Control System and its Effective Implementation Plan in Korea ([논문 철회] 한국의 전략물자 수출통제제도의 문제점과 효율적 이행방안)

  • Lee, Sang-Ok
    • International Commerce and Information Review
    • /
    • v.13 no.3
    • /
    • pp.353-375
    • /
    • 2011
  • Export control was first triggered by international export control system at US led COCOM in 1949. Numerous international efforts such as NPT in 1969, ZC in 1970, NSG in 1978, AG in 1985, MTCR in 1987, Wassenaar Arrangement(WA) establishment in 1995 with 1990's the fall of the Berlin Wall, have been made since. The concept of export control has been changed from weaponry and parts export control to preventing or blocking weaponry, respective goods and relevant technology from the hand of troubled regions and non-state actors as terrorist groups; and the new concept is described as Nonproliferation Control. Extent of control items is not only limited to conventional weaponry, but also includes weapons of mass destruction(WMD) and even dual use items which can be used for production, development, usage or storage. Control items include all items defined by NSG, MTCR, AG, WA, and CMC-Opec. The 9.11 terror had a strong influence on international society. Effort to prevent WMD proliferation has now become the most important issue for international security. This study aims to suggest improvement points for nonproliferation law and its effective implementation, based on problem and limitation identification along with analysis of nonproliferation law and implementation examples by type. Furthermore for the purpose of national and global security, export control system on strategic items which are considered to be a key issue in South and North Korea relationship needs to be effectively managed. Recently, North Korea's missile and nuclear tests have been criticized globally; and the global society including respective countries as China and South Korea is striving to urge export control in line with the UN resolution.

  • PDF

The Applicable Laws to International Intellectual Property License Contracts under the Rome I Regulation (국제 지식재산권 라이센스 계약 분쟁의 준거법 결정 원칙으로서 로마I 규정의 적용에 관한 연구)

  • Moon, Hwa-Kyung
    • Journal of Legislation Research
    • /
    • no.44
    • /
    • pp.487-538
    • /
    • 2013
  • It is the most critical issue in recent international intellectual property licence disputes to decide the applicable laws to the license contracts. As Korea and the European Union(EU) reached free trade agreement(FTA), and the EU-Korea FTA entered into force on July 1, 2011, the FTA has boosted social, economic, cultural exchanges between the two. As a result of the increased transactions in those sectors, legal disputes are also expected to grow. This situation calls for extensive research and understanding of the choice of law principles applicable to international intellectual property license contracts in the EU. To decide the laws applicable to issues arising from international intellectual property license contracts disputes, the characterization of those issues is necessary for the purpose of applying private international law principles to them. In terms of characterization, intellectual property license contracts fall within contractual matters. In the EU, the primary rule of choice of law principles in contractual obligations is the Rome I Regulation. Because the choice of law rules, such as private international law principles, the Rome Convention(1980), and the Rome I Regulation, differ in the time of application, it is essential to clarify the time factor of related contracts. For example, the Rome I Regulation applies to contracts which were concluded as from December 17, 2009. Although party autonomy in international contracts disputes is generally allowed, if there is no choice of law agreement between the parties to the contracts, the objective test rule of private international law doctrine could be the best option. Following this doctrine, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 1 provides the governing law rules based on the types of contracts, but there is no room for intellectual property license contracts. After all, as the rule for governing law of those contracts, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 2 should be applied and if there are countries which are more closely connected to the contracts under the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 3, the laws of those countries become the governing laws of the contracts. Nevertheless, if it is not possible to decide the applicable laws to the license contracts, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 4 should be applied in the last resort and the laws of the countries which are the most closely connected to the contracts govern the license contracts. Therefore, this research on the laws applicable to intellectual property license contracts under the Rome I Regulation suggests more systematic and effective solutions for future disputes in which Korea and the EU countries play the significant role as the connecting factors in the conflict of laws rules. Moreover, it helps to establish comprehensive and theoretical understanding of applying the Korean Private International Law to multifarious choice-of-law cases.