• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.99-125
• /
• 2014

The purpose of this paper is to introduce the arbitral proceeding system in Indonesia. Arbitration in Indonesia is governed by Law No. 30 of 1999 on Arbitration and Alternative Dispute Resolution (Arbitration Law). Also, the Indonesian National Board of Arbitration (BANI) is the main arbitration body in Indonesia. BANI handles both domestic and international disputes. BANI has published its Rules of Arbitral Procedure (the BANI Rules). Within a period of not longer than 30 days after receiving the petition for arbitration, the respondent must submit its reply. Also, if the respondent wishes to assert against the claimant a counter-claim in connection with the dispute, the respondent may submit such counter-claim together with its statement of defense no later than the first hearing. This paper suggests that the following may be some of the disadvantages to using arbitration under the BANI Rules. The first is that final decision or approval regarding the designation of all arbitrators shall be in the hands of the Chairman of BANI. It is the chief problem facing the international stream of arbitration systems. The second is that arbitrators must have certain minimum qualifications. BANI Rules provide the same requirements for the qualifications of the arbitrators as the Arbitration Law. The third is that the BANI Rules require arbitrators in BANI-administered references to be chosen from BANI's list of arbitrators. BANI can also consider a recognized foreign arbitrator if the foreign arbitrator meets the qualification requirements and is prepared to comply with the BANI Rules. This includes the requirement that the appointing party must bear the travel, accommodation, and other special expenses related to the appointment of the foreign arbitrator.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제55권
• /
• pp.33-62
• /
• 2012

Arbitration is an essential methods of settlement for disputes in international commercial transaction. UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules have been in force after adoption in 1976. Over the 30 years, UNCITRAL Arbitration rules have been modeled for domestic and international arbitration institutes for setting and revision on their arbitration rules. UNCITRAL Committee has published the revised Arbitration Rules which entered into force after 15 August 2010. Therefore new version of arbitration rules are substituted for the previous version of UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules 1976 since its enforcement. The revised arbitration rules of UNCITRAL have been changed in various items for convergence with new trends and modern practices on arbitration including information communication and technology. The revision of arbitration rules focused on resolving problems in practice and codifying best practice to enhance the efficiency of arbitration conducted under the rules. There are considerable in a number of important respects on the removing the restricted in writing requirement for information technology, adapting the multiparties arbitration, joinder arbitration, truncated arbitral tribunal and adjustment in terms and condition and construction simply. Also a number of provisions have been refined, varied and clarified with new articles included. Conclusively the new revised arbitration rules fill a number of gaps which became apparent in the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules 1976 to bring into line with new modern practices of international arbitration rules in international commercial disputes. This paper focus on the study the problems and inspired points on significant revised provisions and its considerable points in arbitration environment. This paper is approaching to the comparisons of UNCITRAL revised Arbitration Rules 2010 with previous Arbitration Rules 1976 of UNCITRAL and International Arbitration Rules 2011 of KCAB.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.43-70
• /
• 2007

The purpose of this paper is to make research on the contents and discussions of the draft of revised UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules that have been discussed and considered by the Working Group. At its thirty-ninth session (New York, 19 June-7 July 2006), the Commission agreed that, in respect of future work of the Working Group, priority be given to a revision of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules (1976). At its forty-fifth session (Vienna, 11-15 September 2006), the Working Group undertook to identify areas where a revision of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules might be useful. At that session, it was considered that the focus of the revision should be on updating the Rules to meet changes that had taken place over the last thirty years in arbitral practice. The largely amended provisions of the draft of revised UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules are as follows : Notice of arbitration and response to the notice of arbitration (Article 3), Designating and appointing authorities (Article 4 bis), November of arbitrators (Article 5), Appointment of arbitrations (Article 6), Appointment of arbitrators in multi-party arbitration (Article 7 bis), Challenge of arbitrators (Article 9), Replacement of an arbitrator (Article 13), Pleas as to the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal (Article 21), Interim measures (Article 26), Form and effect of the award (Article 32), and Liability of arbitrators (Proposed additional provisions). There are some differences between the draft of revised UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules and the KCAB Arbitration Rules. In order to jnternationalize the Korea's commercial arbitration system, it is desirable that the main articles of the draft of revised UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules should be admitted to the KCAB Arbitration Rules. In conclusion, the Commission was generally of the view of any revision of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules should not alter the structure of the text, its spirit, its drafting style, and should respect the flexibility of the text rather than make it more complex. The Working Group agreed that harmonizing the provisions of the UNCITRAL Model Law should not be automatic but rather considered only where appropriate.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제31권1호
• /
• pp.129-154
• /
• 2021

As our society and industry develop, disputes are becoming ever more complicated and diversified to the point that it is alleged that dispute resolution by court proceedings has certain limits and setbacks. Therefore, it is commonly suggested that mediation by a qualified mediator should come as an alternative method, and there have been many attempts to establish and provide mediation service in the courts and government authorities. To comply with a party's autonomy, which is the essential basis of mediation, and to promote the use of mediation, it is highly recommended that private mediation, rather than court-driven or administrative mediation, shall take the initiative. In the meantime, despite a number of academic research and attempts to increase the awareness and use of mediation nationwide, we have not yet seen meaningful developments due to the longstanding misunderstanding and discredit of mediation. In contrast, Italy has begun to revitalize mediation by enacting 'Legislative Decree No. 28/2020' following the 'Directive 2008/52EC' of the European Parliament and encouraging the so-called via-mediation policy. It is acknowledged to have significantly contributed to the development of private mediation in Italy and the increased use of mediation as a dispute resolution method. It shall be particularly noted that Italy's mediation proceedings have certain traits, including preliminary mediation meetings, mandatory involvement of legal counsel, and tax benefits for the settled cases by mediation. Italy's efforts would provide people with meaningful lessons and perspectives. As society strives to promote private mediation to distribute and utilize the judicial resources' inefficient ways, institutions need to develop practical measures to increase the number of civil and commercial disputes in the mediation proceedings. To that end, legislative efforts to enact relevant laws necessary to provide incentives to disputing parties and establish integrated education and certification programs to train qualified mediators need to start soon.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제20권3호
• /
• pp.47-69
• /
• 2010

From the review of Korean arbitration systems with the comparison of those of other countries, we can summarize some issues to be tackled as follows: First, Korean arbitration system started with the purpose of export promotion. This may be the main reason that various domestic disputes have not been resolved by arbitration. Second, the Korean Arbitration Law applies to private disputes. The Law's arbitration scope is wider than that of China and France, but narrower than that of the U.S.A. that encompasses a variety of disputes in the filed of consumer, labor, medical services, patents, etc. Third, active judges or public officials in Korea can not be arbitrator and there is no arbitration court. However, if chief judge allows the necessity, court's judges in the UK can be arbitrator with the mutual agreement of the parties and also arbitration system is operated in the court. Fourth, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB), the only representative institution for arbitration in Korea, is under the Ministry of Knowledge Economy(MKE). This makes it difficult for the KCAB to handle other disputes related to the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, the Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, the Ministry of Employment and Labor, etc. Fifth, as mentioned, the KCAB is the unique institution for arbitration by the Law in Korea, while other countries allow have a diversity of arbitration agencies such as maritime arbitration organization, consumer arbitration institution, arbitration court, etc. Therefore, we suggest some ideas to expand the arbitration's area of coverage in Korea as follows: First, there should be more active policies that promote various domestic disputes to be settled by the arbitration system. Second, it is quite needed to expand the scope of arbitration to cover many disputes in the fields of consumer, labor, medical service, advertising, fair trade, etc. Third, there should be discussions to allow court judges as arbitrator and to introduce the arbitration court. Fourth, the KCAB should strengthen its status and roles as general arbitration organization to overcome the limited scope of commercial disputes. For this, there should be the strong support and coordination among the MKE and other government agencies. Fifth, to reduce the burden of the court's complicated and expensive procedures, more efficient disputes resolution systems should be established on the basis of the parties' free will. Each central government agency should streamline the legal barriers to allow industrial organizations under its control to establish their own or joint arbitration system with the KCAB.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제22권3호
• /
• pp.141-163
• /
• 2012

In Korea, although nearly all maritime arbitration cases are dealt with by the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB), the total number of cases that are referred to the KCAB is relatively small compared with the total number of maritime cases that occur in Korea. There may be reasons why maritime arbitration is not utilized more in Korea. However, of the above reasons, the superseding one may be that there is still a lack of confidence in the credibility and foreseeability of maritime arbitration in Korea. To expand the use of maritime arbitration in Korea, it is essential that the base surrounding maritime arbitration be expanded. In addition, it is also necessary that specialists receivetraining in maritime law. In this context, it is strongly recommended that maritime and admiralty law be taught in law schools and be included as a regular subject on the Korean bar exam. Additionally, to promote maritime arbitration, a rule should be introduced allowing for shortened arbitration proceedings in Korea. Although Chapter 8 of the KCAB Arbitration Rules provide for "Expedited Procedure," this process alone is not because the rules for Expedited Procedure generally apply in arbitration cases where both parties have agreed in a separate agreement to follow the procedures provided or in any domestic arbitration valued atless than 100,000,000 Korean won. Therefore, the KCAB Arbitration Rules for Expedited Procedure must be reformed to encompass international arbitrations. Additionally, experts who are experienced in the maritime sector should be elected as arbitrators. Given the factthat a fair number of arbitration cases can be characterized as international, it is important that businesspersons who are very fluent in English be appointed as arbitrators in order to increase the reliability of maritime arbitration in Korea and save costs. Meanwhile, because lawyers and scholars constitute a considerable portion of KCAB arbitrators, commercial persons from relevant industries should be enlisted as arbitrators. Even though there are arguments for the establishment of an independent maritime arbitration board in Korea, establishment of a separate maritime arbitration board will not directly guarantee the prosperity of maritime arbitration in Korea. Instead of instituting a new maritime arbitration board, it is better that a reorganized KCAB modify existing arbitration proceedings to make them faster and more economical if maritime arbitration is to prosper. In this regard, ad-hoc arbitration would be an option for speedy and thrifty maritime arbitration. Finally, to gain the confidence of domestic and foreign parties, we cannot ignore the importance of advertising the specialties and qualifications of the KCAB and its personnel among business entities.

• Animal Systematics, Evolution and Diversity
• /
• 제11권4호
• /
• pp.417-434
• /
• 1995

우리나라 서해 연안의 경기만 황해 전해역, 남해, 대한해협 주변 그리고 동해의 강릉 주변해역 등 한반도의 주변 해역에서 채집된 거미불가사리류 Ophirua 속의 3 종, O.kinbergi 와 O. sarsi 그리고 O.sarsi vadicola 를 대상으로 250개체의 운영분류단위를 무작위적으로 추출, 20개의 형질 및 형태비율을 측정하여 수리분류를 실시하였다. 유클리드 비상사성 지수값( Euclidean distance) 과 비가중 평균결합법(UPGMA)을 이용한 집괴 분석의 결과, 6.84 의 지수값에서는 O.kinbergi, O.sarsi , O.sarsi vadicola의 3개의 표현군으로 구분되었으며, 7.50에서는 O.sarsi 와 O. sarsi vadicola를 한 그룹으로 하는 표현군과 O. kinbergi 로 구성된 표현군으로 구분되었다. 단계적 판별분석의 결과, 종간의 구분 양상을 최적화하는 형질들로서 총완즐의 수 ,1 차 완줄의 형태(2) 등을 포함하는 13 양상을 변수들이 추출되었으며 , 종간 차이를 최적화하는 변수들을 이용한 정준상관 판별분석에서는 3개의 그룹으로 뚜렷이 구분되었다. 각 종별로 형성된 그룹간의 평균거리에서는 3개의 그룹으로 뚜렷이 구분되었다. 각 종별로 형성된 그룹 간의 평균거리에서는 O.sarsi 와 O.sarsi vadicola 가 8.26 의 최단거리를 나타내었고, O.kinbergi 와 O. sarsi vadicola가 24.24 그리고 O.kinbergi 와 O. sarsi 가 21.63 의 거리를 나타내어 O.sarsi vadicola를 아종으로 인정함이 타당하다고 판단되었다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.121-145
• /
• 2008

Northeast Asia is increasingly making a transition to distinctive and crucial region in the 21st Century and growing into one of world's top three economic spheres along with the EU and NAFTA. In 2003, Korean government announced the Northeast Asian economic hub country plan as an important agenda. As a means of coping with the changing global environment, Korean government designated Incheon in 2003 as the country's first Free Economic Zone ahead of Busan and Gwangyang Bay in the south of the country because Incheon has a geographical advantage linking North America and Europe with Incheon International Airport and Incheon Seaport. The purpose of this paper is to make research on establishment and operation of an arbitral body entitled ${\ulcorner}International Arbitration Center{\lrcorner}$ (IAC) within Incheon Free Economic Zone(IFEZ). For the purpose of this, the writer in this paper, reviewed the necessity of the IAC's establishment and its legal basis as well as the role and function of the Center. Also, the writer presented plans for how to operate the IAC and how to cooperate with the key arbitral organizations of foreign countries for the settlement promotion of commercial disputes including trade and investment. With development of the IFEZ, world-renowned enterprises will invest in the Incheon economic bloc and conduct economic activities, business operation, marketing, logistics, financing, etc. In this connection, diverse types of commercial disputes are expected to occur between foreign companies entering the IFEZ and Korean firms. In this connection, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) has been operating its liaison office in the IFEZ since 2004. However, in view of the increasing arbitration demand, the IAC should be set up in the IFEZ in the near future by the positive support of the government in the respect of both administration and finance because the free economic zone-related law provides for the installation of arbitration organization. For the success of the IAC, the Center will have to provide not only good quality of arbitral services that can satisfy arbitration parties but also need to conduct researches and make efforts so that arbitration can be utilized well in the IFEZ. If the IFEZ can provide advantageous business environments to those multinational enterprises intending to the Incheon economic bloc, the IAC will also contribute to the settlement of commercial disputes arising from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex in North Korea in view of the geographical advantage and logistic benefit of the IFEZ. Finally, this paper also suggests a new model for a joint dispute resolution system by the initiative of Korean government and Korean arbitral organizations for the settlement of commercial disputes within Northeast Asia, for which the CAMCA(Commercial Arbitration and Mediation Center for the Americas) of NAFTA can be a good example.

• 기술경영경제학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 기술경영경제학회 1997년도 제11회 하계학술발표회 논문집
• /
• pp.222-223
• /
• 1997

인공씨감자 대량생산기술 상업화 사례는 모방 중심의 연구개발풍토 하에서 드물게 찾아볼 수 있는 출연(연)에 뿌리를 둔 Technology push형의 창조형 혁신사례이다. 본 논문은 모방형 연구개발풍토에서의 창조형 기술혁신사례를 분석함으로써 창조적 혁신의 성공요인을 발굴하여 지식창조 지향의 연구관리 모형 제시를 시도하였다. 출연(연)에 뿌리를 둔 Technology push형 혁신은 연구자 관점의 연구개발단계와 기업가 관점의 기업화 단계로 구분된다. 연구자 관점의 연구개발단계에서는 연구자의 고집과 집념 그리고 상사의 후원에 의해서 창의적인 아이디어가 살아남아 가능성 있는 기술로 발전할 수 있었으며, 연구성과에 대한 언론보도 및 외부세계의 관심과 기대, 민간기업의 참여는 연구자에게 심리적 압박(pressure)을 제공하나 연구자의 몰입을 촉진하는 효과를 가져왔다. 현장문제에 대한 몸으로의 체험 그리고 지식창조 체험은 중요한 암묵적 지식(tacit knowledge)이며, 연구자의 연구몰입을 가속화시켰다. 기업가 관점의 기업화 단계에서는 선진외국에서 검증된 기술을 도입개량하는데 익숙해 있고 새로운 창조형 혁신 경험이 없는 개발도상국의 입장에서 법적, 제도적, 사회적 요인 등 많은 장애요인이 등장하였다. 결국 새로운 개념의 혁신 추진과정에서 나타나는 많은 장애요인을 극복할 수 있는 지속적인 노력이 중요하였으며, 연구자의 기업가 정신(entrepreneurship), 참여기업의 기업화 의지와 노력이 중요하게 작용하였다. 또한 Technology push형 기술혁신에서 나타나는 소비자의 수용성을 제고시킬 수 있는 개선노력이 중요하다. 한편 Technology Push형 연구는 실용화까지 많은 시행착오 함께 약 10여년이라는 긴 시간이 필요하게 되는데, 장기간의 연구개발재원을 어떻게 조달하느냐가 창조적 기술혁신 성패의 관건이다. 이 과정에서 angel과 promoter의 역할이 중요하다.물질(hydrophilic components)은 30~33%정도의 분포를 보였고, 전염소 및 전오존 공정을 거친 처리수에서는 각각 62.2-62.8%, 43.9~49.0% 및 50~ 55%, 40~57% 정도의 분포를 보였다. 그리고 웅집-침전을 거친 처리수에서는 그 분포가 77~82%, 24-48%였다. 전주리 공정을 통하여 소수성 물질(byoghobic components)의 분포가 감 소하는 것을 볼 때 전염소 및 전오존 처리가 용존유기물의 응집에는 오히려 역 효과를 나타내는 것으로 판단된다. 것으로 판단된다.여 황토 2g에 대하여 Hieltijes and Lijklema 방법에 의해 Adsorbed-p, Nonapatite inorganic-P(NAI-P), Apatite-p, Organic-P로 구분하여 분석하고, 총인(Total Phosphorus)을 Standard Methods에 따라 Persulfate digestion후 0.45 m membrane 여지 여과하여 여액에 대해 PO3-4-P의 농도를 Ascorbic Acid 법으로 측정한 결과, NAI-P가 가장 큰 비율을 차지하였고, 부원료로 첨가된 금속 양이온 중 Fe3-이온이 흡착에 기여하는 정도가 가장 큰 것으로 평가되었다.다당류 T-AS의 보체 활성화 기작은 classical과 alternative complement pathway의 양 경로를 통해 활성화 되었다. T-AS 분획은 mouse내의 특정 혈청단백을 증가시켰으며, 항체 생성능의 증가가 관찰되어 effect T 세포의 활성화가 나타나고 있음을 알 수 있었다. T-AS는 생체내 투여시에 대식세포의 탐식능이 증진되었으며, 대식세포 기능 저해제에 의한 대식세포의 기능 저해 현상이 회복되었다. 이와 같은 결과들로부터, T-AS의 항암 활성은 활성화된 보체 성분 및 당 수용체들이 존재하는 대식세포의 개입을 시사한다.가능성과 그 방법의 모색에 관심을 갖게 되었으며