• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.7 no.6
• /
• pp.1319-1336
• /
• 2006

The successive round of talks oil Korea-USA Free Trade Agreement (FTA) has continued, and it also has the Intellectual property(IPR) unit. Until now, tile one of most disputing concerns in IPR unit through talks is the limitation of compulsory license of claimed invention. The US is urging to establish a safeguard for IPR, as similar measure of the US, to protecting the profit of the US enterprises through these on-going talks, it is more likely expected to take the offensive about infringement of the patent seriously. Based on the current circumstances, the provision strategy study is needed to obtain Korea inventors the first inventor defense under the US patent law system as well as understand the current Korea's patent law and its revision against that in the US. In patent Law, both nations with first to file system and first to invent system permit a prior user of an invention to continue to use the invention notwithstanding its subsequent patenting by another under being subject to certain qualifications and limitations, even though a patent by a later inventor is granted. Normally, the first inventor defense has been used to compensate the drawbacks of the first to file system. The US patent Law, however, adopting the first to invent system admits the first inventor defense. Therefore, pursuing counteract provision under consideration with Korean patent Law system and research environment along with investigating the reason why the US adopted its patent law system, the scope of right, and the new reform of Act. 2005 of the institute, which promotes the first Korean inventor to possess the defense right of the US, provides certain preparations for Korean companies against the expected offensive from the US ones under the US patent Law system.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.16 no.4
• /
• pp.115-133
• /
• 2021

This study examines the concept and related technologies of the 4th industrial revolution that has been mixed so far and examines the socio-economic changes and influences resulting from it, and the cases of responding to the 4th industrial revolution in major countries. Based on this, by deriving SWOT factors and calculating the importance of each factor for Korean venture companies to prepare for the forth industrial revolution, it was intended to help the government and policymakers in suggesting directions for establishing related policies. Furthermore, the purpose of this study was to suggest a direction for securing global competitiveness to Korean venture entrepreneurs and to help with basic and systematic analysis for further academic in-depth research. For this study, a total of 21 items derived through extensive literature research and data research to understand what are the necessary competency factors for internal and external environmental changes in order for Korean venture companies to have global competitiveness in the era of the 4th Industrial Revolution. After reviewing SWOT factors by three expert groups and confirming them through Delphi survey, the importance of each item was analyzed by using AHP, a systematic decision-making technique. As a result of the analysis, it was shown that Strength(48%), Opportunity(25%), Threat(16%), Weakness(11%) were considered important in order. In terms of sub-items, 'quick and flexible commercialization capability', 'platform/big data/non-face-to-face service activation', and 'ICT infrastructure and it's utilization' were shown to be of the comparatively high importance. On the other hand, in the lower three items, 'macro-economic stability and social infrastructure', 'difficulty in entering overseas markets due to global protectionism', and 'absolutely inferior in foreign investment' were found to have low priority. As a result of the correlation verification by item to see differences in opinions by industry, academia, and policy expert groups, there was no significant difference of opinion, as industry and academic experts showed a high correlation and industry experts and policy experts showed a moderate correlation. The correlation between the academic and policy experts was not statistically significant (p<0.01), so it was analyzed that there was a difference of opinion on importance. This was due to the fact that policy experts highly valued 'quick and flexible commercialization', which are strengths, and 'excellent educational system and high-quality manpower' and 'creation of new markets' which are opportunity items, while academic experts placed great importance on 'support part of government policy', which are strengths. The implication of this study is that in order for Korean venture companies to secure competitiveness in the field of the 4th industrial revolution, it is necessary to have a policy that preferentially supports the relevant items of strengths and opportunity factors. The difference in the details of strength factors and opportunity factors, which shows a high level of variability, suggests that it is necessary to actively review it and reflect it in the policy.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.203-234
• /
• 2019

The concept of denied boarding is defined in Article 2(j) of Regulation 261/2004 thus: "denied boarding means a refusal to carry passengers on a flight, although they have presented themselves for boarding under the conditions laid down in Article 3(2), except where there are reasonable grounds to deny them boarding, such as reasons of health, safety or security, or inadequate travel documentation." So far as relevant to this case, to be entitled to compensation, if denied boarding, Article 3(2) provides a passenger must first come within the scope of the protection of the Regulation, which applies under the following conditions: "${\cdots}$.that passengers (a) have a confirmed reservation on the flight concerned and, except in the case of cancellation referred to in Article 5, present themselves for check-in, as stipulated and at the time indicated in advance and in writing (including by electronic means) by the air carrier, the tour operator or an authorised travel agent, or, if no time is indicated, not later than 45 minutes before the published departure time." This paper reviews the EU Cases such as Rodríguez Cachafeiro v. Iberia [2012] Case C-321/11; Finnair Oyj v. Timy Lassooy [2012] Case C-22/11; Caldwell v. easyJet Airline Co. Ltd. [2015] ScotSC 64. ECJ and Sheriff court of Scotland held that the concept of denied boarding, within the meaning of Articles 2(j) and 4 of Regulation No 261/2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation No 295/91, must be interpreted as relating not only to cases where boarding is denied because of overbooking but also to those where boarding is denied on other grounds, such as operational reasons. Also, ECJ ruled that Articles 2(j) and 4(3) must be interpreted as meaning that the occurrence of extraordinary circumstances resulting in an air carrier rescheduling flights after those circumstances arose cannot give grounds for denying boarding on those later flights or for exempting that carrier from its obligation, under Article 4(3) of that regulation, to compensate a passenger to whom it denies boarding on such a flight.

• Journal of Ginseng Culture
• /
• v.1
• /
• pp.11-27
• /
• 2019

The Jurchens, the ancestors of the Qing Manchus, had lived scattered in Manchuria and had made their living mostly on ginseng gathering and animal hunting. Their residential areas, rich with deep forest and numerous rivers, provided great habitation for all kinds of flora and fauna, but not so proper for agriculture. Based on their activities of foraging and hunting, the Jurchens developed a unique social organization that was later transformed into the Banner System, the most distinctive Qing military institution. By the sixteenth century, that the external trade brought considerable changes to Jurchen society. A huge amount of foreign silver, imported from Japan and South America to China, first invigorated commercial economy in China proper, and later caused a huge influence on Ming frontier regions, including Manchuria. In the late sixteenth century when the tradition of foraging and hunting encountered with silver economy, the Jurchen tribes became unified after years of competition and transformed themselves into the Manchus to build the Qing empire in 1636. In 1644 the Manchus succeeded in conquering the China Proper and moved into Beijing. Even after that, the Manchu imperial court never forgot the value of Manchurii ginseng; instead, they paid great efforts to monopolize this profitable root. Until the late seventeenth century, the Qing court used the Banner System to manage Manchurian ginseng. The banner soldiers stationed in Manchuria checked unauthorized civilian entrances in this frontier and protected its ginseng producing mountains from the Han Chinese people. All the process of ginseng gathering was managed by the institutions under the direct control of the imperial court, such as the Imperial Household Department, the Butha Ula Office, and the Three Upper Banner in Shengjing. Banner soldiers were dispatched to the given mountains, collect the given amount of ginseng, and send them to the imperial court in Beijing. The state monopoly of ginseng was maintained throughout the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries under the principle that Manchuria and its natural resources should be guarded from civilian encroachment. At the same time, Manchurian ginseng was considered as an important source of state revenue. The imperial court and financial bureau wanted to collect ginseng as much as they needed. By the late seventeenth century as the ginseng management by the banner soldiers failed in securing the ginseng tax, the Qing court began to invite civil merchants to ginseng business. During the eighteenth century the Qing ginseng policy became more dependent on civil merchants, both their money and management. In 1853 the Qing finally ended the ginseng monopoly, but it was before the early eighteenth century that wealthy merchants hired ginseng gatherers and paid ginseng tax to the state. The Qing monopoly of ginseng was in fact maintained by the active participation of civil merchants in the ginseng business.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.55
• /
• pp.167-191
• /
• 2018

Despite international cooperation, piracy has not yet been eradicated in major waters around the world. From the perspective of South Korea, which is absolutely dependent on exporting and importing, it's a lifeline for us to secure safe maritime traffic so it is a situation we have to be vigilant about maritime safety and security. However, criminal law on punishment of piracy is still insufficient and legislative consideration is needed. Since pirates are regarded as enemies of humankind, all nations can punish pirates regardless of their damage. The international community has done its best in cooperation from hundreds of years ago to secure maritime trade through this universal jurisdiction and marine transportation in international waters which is an essential space for military activities, particularly in the Gulf of Aden, the advanced nations have dispatched fleets to combat maritime security threats through joint operations to crack down on Somali pirates. Even if universal jurisdiction is allowed for piracy in accordance with the International Convention on Human Rights and the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, it is difficult to effectively deal with piracy if it not fully complied with a domestic legal system for this purpose or is stipulated as different from international regulations. In other words, universal jurisdiction corresponding to international norms and constitution of piracy should be defined in criminal law in accordance with criminal statutory law. If the punishment of pirates by unreasonably applying our criminal law without prejudice to such work can lead to diplomatic disputes in violation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights or other international norms. In South Korea, there is no provision to explicitly prescribe piracy as a crime, but punish similar acts like piracy in criminal law and maritime safety law. However, there is a limit to effective piracy punishment because we are not fully involved in internationally accepted piracy. In this study, we critically examine the proposals of the constitutional elements of piracy, propose the legislative direction, and insist on the introduction of globalism to pirate sins.