• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Disaster Information Conference
• /
• 2022.10a
• /
• pp.239-240
• /
• 2022

공사장에서 발생하고 있는 먼지는 현장 근로자뿐만 아니라 인근 주민들의 건강에 치명적인 영향을 미치고 있다. 공사장 인근 주민들이 환경분쟁조정위원회에 먼지피해에 대한 피해배상을 청구하고 있지만 공사장 먼지피해 수인한도 초과여부를 확인하기 위한 측정, 예측, 평가가 어려워 먼지피해에 대한 보상이 제대로 이루어지지 않고 있다. 공사장 먼지관리의 법적기준이며 먼지 저감에 대한 구체적인 방법을 제시하고 있는"비산먼지 억제조치기준"의 준수 등을 점수로 평가하여 일정 점수 이하인 경우 피해배상액을 차등 적용하는 방안을 제안한다. 본 안이 제도화된다면 건설사는 먼지피해 배상액 지출을 줄이기 위해 현재보다 한층 더 먼지 저감 노력을 강화할 것이기에 먼지 발생을 획기적으로 줄일 수 있어서 현장 근로자 및 인근 주민들의 먼지피해를 최소화할 수 있으며, 먼지로 인한 환경, 보건 법규위반예방과 쾌적한 작업환경으로 노동 생산성 확보와 먼지로 인한 피해 배상액 지급 등 손실을 줄일 수 있을 것이라고 생각한다.

• KSCE Journal of Civil and Environmental Engineering Research
• /
• v.37 no.6
• /
• pp.1053-1061
• /
• 2017

The study is concerned with providing the improvement method on making a reasonable and scientific decision on the damages accrued from the bid rigging in the construction work. According to the review on the precedent studies and decision cases on the damages caused by bid rigging, the representative problems include the insufficiency of the classification system on the damage calculation method and the omission of the necessary stage in the damage determination process. First, the improved classification system on calculating the damages caused by bid rigging is presented with the application to the bid rigging in the construction work by adding the ratio factor in addition to the damage calculation parameters such as price and cost. Second, the standard procedures organized with six stages is presented as the process required for determining the damages if the indemnification for bid rigging is claimed. The study becomes the foundation for resolving the problem with the undue burden on a party and for preventing the opportunity loss by resolving a dispute early through the improvement classification system and standard procedures presented in the study.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.62
• /
• pp.3-32
• /
• 2014

Article 77 sets forth the principle of prevention applied in several legal systems. Under this principle the party threatened by ooss as a consequence of a breach of contract by the other party is not permitted to await passively incurrence of the loss and then sue for damages. He is obliged to take adequate preventive measures to mitigate his loss. If the injured party abstains from taking such excessive measures he will not be considered to have failed to mitigate the loss under Article 77. The sanction provided in Article 77 against a party who fails to mitigate his loss only enables the other party to claim reduction in the damages. The reduction in damages under Article 77 is equal to the amount by which the loss should have been mitigated if the injured party had taken reasonable measures to avert or to lessen it. The aim of Article 77 is to encourage mitigation of the loss. The duty to mitigate the loss applies not only to a breach of contract in respect of an obligation whose performance is currently due. but also to an anticipatory breach of contract under Article 71. Article 85 contemplates that the buyer is in delay in fulfilling the latter obligation, or else that he fails to pay the price when payment is to be made concurrently with delivery of the goods by the seller. In both these situations of default, the seller who is either in possession of the goods or otherwise able to control their disposition must take measures, reasonable in the circumstances, to preserve them. The right of retention of the goods y the seller exists until he is reimbursed by the other party for the reasonable expenses incurred. Article 87 and Article 88 of the Convention grant different rights to the party obligated to take steps to preserve the goods; Article 87 allows him to deposit them in the warehouse of a third person, and Article 88 to sell them by whatever means appropriate. A difference exists between paragraph Article 88 (1) which grants the right to sell, and paragraph (2) which imposes the duty to take reasonable measures to sell the goods.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.17 no.12
• /
• pp.180-190
• /
• 2017

This is Kangwon Land casino case due to the damages of betting money, which is likely to affect the contents industry in the future. The reason why the gambler and his family's suit is that why the manager did not control their own access or did not supervise the wagering rules. The provisions of the "Restriction on the amount of money to be paid to the casino" in the Article 14 of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Support for the Development of the Abandoned Mine Area are not intended to increase the duty of the casino managers. It is just one of many public regulations imposed. No matter what legislation is made for public interest, it can not be considered equally in the private duty. If so, too much effort will be required to enact or amend the public law and this makes the legislative activity impossible. The Act on the Restriction on Access to the Casino shall be construed accordingly. From the point of view of economic efficiency theory, if we overestimate statutory duties (liability for compensation) excessively, the price goes up on the market, and the volume of transaction decreases drastically. This reduces the economic utility of resources in the society as a whole (total output, foreign currency acquisition amount, etc.).

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.48 no.3
• /
• pp.23-41
• /
• 2023

The seller and the buyer write down the agreed details in the trade contract as trade contract clauses. In the case where a letter of credit is agreed to be the payment condition, the buyer shall open a letter of credit to the seller with the shipping date specified in the trade contract through its bank. In this case, the legal relationship between the performance date of the trade contract and the shipment date of the letter of credit, the change of the performance date of the trade contract due to the change of the trade contract and the change of the shipment date specified in the letter of credit, the seller's letter of credit A problem arises in the legal interpretation of the approval period and the change request period. Therefore, this paper analyzed the precedents of the Seongnam Branch of the Suwon District Court and the Seoul High Court related to these legal issues. The performance date of a trade contract is the seller's delivery date and the buyer's payment date. In the letter of credit transaction, the date of performance of the trade contract is regarded as the date of shipment and the date of negotiation of documents specified in the letter of credit. The seller must decide whether to accept the letter of credit within 5 banking days after receiving the letter of credit from the buyer. After this period has elapsed, the seller cannot refuse the letter of credit. However, if the buyer is unable to decide whether to accept the letter of credit within 5 banking days due to reasons attributable to the buyer, the delivery date specified in the letter of credit will be extended. If the seller requests an amendment to the letter of credit, the buyer must accept it and open the letter of credit the seller desires to the seller. If the buyer refuses the seller's request to change the letter of credit, company A has the obligation to change and reopen the letter of credit as requested by company B. Expect by agreeing on the quotation As it is a fundamental breach of contract stipulated in Article 25 of the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods, company B can cancel the trade contract and claim damages from company A. Compensation for damages caused by Company A's breach of the trade contract shall be an amount equal to the loss suffered by Company B as a result of the breach, including loss of profits.