• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제20권3호
• /
• pp.121-145
• /
• 2010

In the past, ADR has not been used as frequently in Japan as it has in other parts of the industrialized world. However, though litigation is still the most utilized vehicle of dispute resolution by Japanese financial institutions, this will be changing. The New Financial ADR system, which was created by a June 2009 amendment to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, is meant to deal with every stage of financial-related disputes and, as such, strives to resolve disputes before they become significant and acts to ameliorate any post-ADR issues that may remain, thereby completing the FIEA's purpose to protect investors. Since the foundation of the New Financial ADR system applies to all related industries, new provisions were set out in 16 business related acts, such as the Banking Act, the Insurance Business Act, and FIEA itself. October 2010 will mark the formal introduction of a new system of financial ADR in Japan. New Financial ADR in Japan will be modeled on the Financial Ombudsman Service in the United Kingdom, but will not feature one comprehensive dispute resolution system in which one dispute resolution institution covers all disputes in the financial field. The New Financial ADR system is merely one step towards a foundation of comprehensive financial ADR such as FOS. It must be noted, however, that this all important first step was over seven years in the making, involving a great deal of discussion, debate, and compromise amongst many parts of Japanese government, business, and society. The New Financial ADR system grants participating parties the ability to stop the clock on any statute of limitations which may correspond to any future possible court cases related to the dispute,13 and further grants the ability to suspend related court proceedings while the parties are utilizing the New Financial ADR system. In addition, where financial institutions have not accepted dispute resolution proceedings or have not accepted a special conciliation proposal, the Ministry of Finance may issue an order compelling compliance if it is found that certain actions are necessary to ensure the appropriate operations of a financial institution's business. In Japan, as best practices have not yet been created.

• 정보보호학회논문지
• /
• 제30권2호
• /
• pp.279-286
• /
• 2020

4차 산업혁명의 핵심 자원인 데이터의 융합과 활용을 촉진하여 데이터 산업의 발전을 지원하기 위해 2020년 2월 4일 「개인정보 보호법」이 개정 되었다. 법에서 적용하는 범위가 통신사업자와 금융사업자는 물론 개인정보 처리 사업자까지 늘어남에 따라 관련된 분쟁조정의 범위도 늘어날 것으로 보인다. 이에 본 논문에서는 개인정보 분쟁위원회의 역할·기능과 개인정보 분쟁조정의 제도적 기준에 대한 소개를 먼저하고, 개인정보 분쟁조정위원회가 데이터 3법개정에 따라 앞으로 해야 할 이슈에 대해 연구해 보았다. 이번 연구에서는 개인정보 분쟁조정에 대한 효율적인 운영을 위해 분야별 전문가 심의, 새로운 산업 기술에 대한 신규 조정기준, 개인정보 분쟁위원회와 개인정보위원회와의 업무연속성 확보방안, 조정결정과 법원간의 연계성 확보, 집단 분쟁 조정의 운영기준 강화 등을 제시하였다.