• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Noise and Vibration Engineering Conference
• /
• 2014.10a
• /
• pp.7-9
• /
• 2014

An auditory experiment was conducted to establish annoyance criteria for floor impact noise in apartment buildings. Heavyweight floor impact sounds were recorded using an impact ball; the impact sound pressure level (SPL) together with the temporal decay rate (DR), which is quantified by the dB drop per second, was analyzed. For the experiment, A-weighted exposure levels of the heavy-weight floor impact sounds ranging 34~73 dB were evaluated at 3 dB intervals. Participants used a 7-point verbal scale to evaluate the level of annoyance from floor impact noise. The results show that the annoyance increases with increasing impact SPL and decreasing DR. Consequently, a classification and an acceptable level of floor impact sounds were proposed.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.75-111
• /
• 2020

The civilian drone world has evolved in recent years from one dominated by hobbyists to growing involvement by companies seeking to profit from unmanned flight in everything from infrastructure inspections to drone deliveries that are already subject to regulations. Drone flight under the property right relation with the land owner would be deemed legal on the condition that expeditious and innocent passage of drone flight over the land be assured. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) enshrines the concept of innocent passage through a coastal state's territorial sea. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state. A vessel in innocent passage may traverse the coastal state's territorial sea continuously and expeditiously, not stopping or anchoring except in force majeure situations. However, the disturbances caused by drone flight may be removed, which is defined as infringement against the constitutional interest of personal rights. For example, aggressive infringement against privacy and personal freedom may be committed by drone more easily than ever before, and than other means. The cost-benefit analysis, however, has been recognjzed as effective criteria regarding the removal of disturbances or injunction decision. Applying that analysis, the civil action against such infringement may not find suitable basis for making a good case. Because the removal of such infringement through civil actions may result in only the deletion of journal article. The injunction of drone flight before taking the information would not be obtainable through civil action, Therefore, more detailed and meticulous regulation and criteria in public law domain may be preferable than civil action, at present time. It may be suitable for legal stability and drone industry to set up the detailed public regulations restricting the free flight of drone capable of acquiring visual information amounting to the infrigement against the right of personal information security.

• KIEAE Journal
• /
• v.10 no.5
• /
• pp.109-114
• /
• 2010

There are many business in complex building, and recently noise claims have increased in those buildings. It is one of the most desirable methods reducing the noise level to establish the noise criteria considering the admittable noise level between the source and receiving room, which are to be derived from the subjective response in the real conditions. Because the degree of annoyance and loudness for the intruding noises in complex building could be changed with background noise level, it is suggested to be researched the relationship between the noise levels and subjective response. In this study, the subjective response for three different background levels in receiving business or rooms were investigated for the typical eight business noise source including aerobic music. The results can be summarized as follows. In conditions of low background noise level(40 dB(A)), there is a tendency of intentionally attention situation (listening) in a subjective test. The other hand in conditions of relatively high background noise level(50 dB(A)), there is a unconscious situation (heraing). As the degree of moderately heard or annoyed in SD rating scale means that the noise is easily recognized in neighboring shops, usually the limit of noise criteria were decided on this rating point, so it will be reasonable to be adopted the criteria rating scale as slight heard or annoyed degree (SD criteria 3).

• Proceedings of the Korean Society for Noise and Vibration Engineering Conference
• /
• 2008.04a
• /
• pp.876-878
• /
• 2008

The standards of acceptable limit and compensation is one of the most important things in environmental noise and vibration disputes resolution. In this paper, review on the present acceptable limit level and compensation standard in National Environmental Dispute Resolution Commission is introduced. Discordance of standards between in the regulation law and in the dispute resolution commission and it's improvement are discussed. Abnormal reasoning for compensation standards is pointed out from a author's private view.

• 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.

• Journal of the Korea Academia-Industrial cooperation Society
• /
• v.14 no.12
• /
• pp.6602-6609
• /
• 2013

This study is expected to provide background data for establishing mitigation measures for malodor and for comparing complex odor criteria. The impact of malodor at the afflicted locations was analyzed using Industrial Source Complex Short Term 3 (ISCST3) model, which was recommended by the EPA. The Odor Emission Rates (ODR) for piglets and hogs were predicted based on the average, minimum, and maximum emission rates as classification. The forecasting result of the complex odor modelling of pigsty showed that tolerance limit was exceeded at an adjacent administration building, but tolerance limit was not surpassed at an afflicted location which was within 185m from the pigsty. The ISCST3 modelling of the satisfactory ODR for tolerance limit was accomplished at the administration building. From the prediction of this modelling, maximum emission rates based on 1hr at administration building were 10.59~52.93, 19.05~31.76, and 10.59 $OU/m^3/s/m^2$ at emission rates of 50%, 30%, and 10%. This emission rate was slightly higher than the tolerance limit of 10.00 $OU/m^3/s/m^2$. However, it was inferred that the tolerance limit could be satisfied if the emission rate of 10% was controlled.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.3-48
• /
• 2021

Among the major rulings handed down in 2020, there were cases involving anaphylaxis, which is timely as a side effect of coronavirus and flu vaccine. And as a rare case, a ruling was handed down that if medical treatment was done so unfaithfully beyond the limit of patience of ordinary people, it can be an independent illegal act and a cause of compensation for emotional distress. Also, there was a ruling in the appellate court that evaluated disability rate applying the Korean Academy of Medical Sciences Guides for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, not McBride system. And the supreme court made it clear that telemedicine is illegitimate. In relation to duty of explanation, it is in the process of adding detail criterion on the firm principles in the individual cases. In regard of medical records, there was a case that even when a medical record is strongly suspected to be tampered with, it is not considered to be an obstruction of proof. There were cases that resulted in different conclusion between the court of first instance and the appellate court rulings. Lastly, in the face of a growing number of cases in which doctors are sentenced to prison for malpractice, we reviewed a ruling that sentenced a doctor to prison.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.317-343
• /
• 2014

In order to account for whether a doctor should indemnify damages resulted from violation of duty of care, the fact that a doctor violated duty of care, that damages were incurred, and the link between violation of duty of care and damages incurred, respectively, should be verified. So even though a doctor violated duty of care to patients, he or she will not bear the responsibility to indemnify damages unless it is not verified. If a doctor's negligence in medical practices is assessed that obviously unfaithful medical practice far exceeds the limit of admission of a patient, it will not go against people's general perception of justice or law and order to constitute a medical malpractice itself as an illegal action that will require liabiliy for damage. However, when the limit of admission is set too low, a patient's benefit and expectation of proper medical treatment can be violated. In contrast, if the limit of admission is set high, it can leave too little room for doctors' discretion for treatments due to a bigger risk of indemnification for damages. Thus, a reasonable balance that can satisfy both benefit and expectation of patients and doctors' right to treatment is needed.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.211-253
• /
• 2005

Recently, the Korean Supreme Court released two important decisions concerning damages for the pain and suffering from Aircraft noise. The local people who are living near the Air Force practice site at Maehyang-ri and the Kimpo International Airport brought lawsuits against the Korean government requesting damages for their financial loss from the severe noise and the damages for their pain and suffering. Plaintiffs alleged that they suffered physical malfunctions, extreme disturbances and the reduction of property values from the extreme noises which were daily repeated. District Court of Seoul Province did not allow plaintiffs all but the damages for pain and suffering. Plaintiffs could not prove the causation between their financial loss and the noise. The Supreme Court confirmed the lower court's decision. Article V of the National Compensation Act (analogous to the Federal Tort Claims Act of the USA) reads, "the government shall be liable for any loss caused by the defect on establishment or maintenance of public facilities." In the two cases, the major issue was whether the government's establishment or maintenance of Air Force practice site and the airport was defective because they caused serious noise to surrounding neighbors. Previously, the Supreme Court interpreted the clause "defect on establishment or maintenance of public facilities" as failure of duty to provide safety measures to the degree generally required to ordinary manager. However the Court at this time interpreted differently that the defect could be found if the facility caused to any person loss to the degree intolerable. In the two cases the Court confirmed the lower court's finding that noise level at the site was severe enough to be intolerable. This standard is based on the severity of the loss rather than the failure of duty. It became easier for plaintiffs to prove the cause of action under this interpretation. The consequence of the ruling of these two cases is 'rush to the courtroom' by the local people at similar situations. The ruling of these two cases was not appropriate both in theory and in consequence. The Korean tort system is basically based on the theory of negligence. Strict liability is exceptional only when there is special legislation. The Court created strict liability rule by interpreting the Art. V of the National Compensation Act. This is against the proper role of the court. The result of the cases is also dismal. The government was already sued by a number of local people for damages. Especially the Department of Defense which is operating many airports nationwide has financial hardship, which will cause downsizing military practice by the Air Force in the long run, This is no good to anyone. Tens of millions of dollars which might be used for compensation might be better used to prevent further noise problem surrounding airports.