• Title/Summary/Keyword: 부당변경방지

Search Result 2, Processing Time 0.015 seconds

A Trend Analysis and Technology Application of Defense Technology Protection (방위산업 기술보호 동향분석 및 기법적용)

  • Lee, Hyo Keun;Lee, Woon Soon;Oh, Yoo Jin;Park, ShinSuk
    • Journal of the Korea Institute of Military Science and Technology
    • /
    • v.20 no.4
    • /
    • pp.579-586
    • /
    • 2017
  • The defense industry has become a global industry, and military technology is actively being traded between countries to increase their military capabilities. The Republic of Korea has been ranked one of the top 10 countries for exports of military technology. To maintain competitive advantages in the global defense industry, it is essential to protect key technologies employed by exported weapon systems. Various techniques have been developed for protection of confidential technologies in weapon systems, and the U.S. DoD has been leading the development of the protection techniques. This paper reviews current anti-tampering techniques that prevent leakage of key technology from weapon exportation or pillage. Based on the protection techniques employed by the U.S. DoD Anti-Tamper Executive Agent, this paper suggests novel design methods for protection of confidential technologies. The proposed design methods were tested on an actual weapon system.

The Obligation of Return Unjust Enrichment or Compensation for the Use of Flight Safety Zone -Seoul High Court Judgment 2018Na2034474, decided on 2018. 10. 11.- (비행안전구역의 사용에 대한 부당이득반환·손실 보상 의무의 존부 -서울고등법원 2018. 10. 11. 선고 2018나2034474 판결-)

  • Kwon, Chang-Young;Park, Soo-Jin
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.35 no.1
    • /
    • pp.63-101
    • /
    • 2020
  • 'Flight safety zone' means a zone that the Minister of National Defense designates under Articles 4 and 6 of the Protection of Military Bases and Installations Act (hereinafter 'PMBIA') for the safety of flight during takeoff and landing of military aircrafts. The purpose of flight safety zone is to contribute to the national security by providing necessary measures for the protection of military bases and installations and smooth conduct of military operations. In this case, when the state set and used the flight safety zone, the landowner claimed restitution of unjust enrichment against the country. This article is an analysis based on the existing legal theory regarding the legitimacy of plaintiff's claim, and the summary of the discussion is as follows. A person who without any legal ground derives a benefit from the property or services of another and thereby causes loss to the latter shall be bound to return such benefit (Article 741 of the Civil Act). Since the subject matter is an infringing profit, the defendant must prove that he has a legitimate right to retain the profit. The State reserves the right to use over the land designated as a flight safety zone in accordance with legitimate procedures established by the PMBIA for the safe takeoff and landing of military aircrafts. Therefore, it cannot be said that the State gained an unjust enrichment equivalent to the rent over the land without legal cause. Expropriation, use or restriction of private property from public necessity and compensation therefor shall be governed by Act: provided, that in such a case, just compensation shall be paid (Article 23 (1) of the Constitution of The Republic of KOREA). Since there is not any provision in the PMBIA for loss compensation for the case where a flight safety zone is set over land as in this case, next question would be whether or not it is unconstitutional. Even if it is designated as a flight safety zone and the use and profits of the land are limited, the justification of the purpose of the flight safety zone system, the appropriateness of the means, the minimization of infringement, and the balance of legal interests are still recognized; thus just not having any loss compensation clause does not make the act unconstitutional. In conclusion, plaintiff's claim for loss compensation based on the 'Act on Acquisition of and Compensation for land, etc. for Public Works Projects', which has no provision for loss compensation due to public limits, is unjust.