• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.20
• /
• pp.365-392
• /
• 2009

The increased concern about national security in the U.S. after the 9/11 terrorist attacks has influenced public rights of access to government information and its legal foundation, the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Public access to government information has been restricted at the policy level by a series of legislative and executive changes in FOIA after September 11, 2001, but the examination of statistics on FOIA implementation between fiscal years 1999 and 2004 shows that the strengthened national security measures did not have a considerable impact at the implementation level during this period. These contrasting findings might be due to the public officials' informal reaction to the criticism of the restriction on public access, bureaucratic inertia, and the use of new record categories not subject to FOIA.

• Journal of Science and Technology Studies
• /
• v.11 no.2
• /
• pp.31-66
• /
• 2011

The main issue in Korean debates over genetically modified (GM) foods have been government's responsibility to guarantee consumers' right-to-know and make informed choice. Counter-experts' critique over the current regulatory processes based upon substantial equivalence have not been widely publicized. Through interviews and textual analysis, this paper explored three groups' performances in Korean GM food controversies-regulatory scientists, civil society organizations, and counter-experts. Analytic focus was made upon how each of the groups interact with current GM food regulations. While making conflicts with regulatory scientists and their 'discourse of compliance with global standards,' counter-experts were excluded from regulatory processes. This article suggests that the processes and contexts in which counter-experts failed to form strong alliance with other groups need to be examined in order to further understand the specific contours of Korean GM food controversies.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.12 no.7
• /
• pp.156-168
• /
• 2012

As the increase of violent crimes such as robbery, murder, and rape has become a social problem, the government is considering institutionalizing the identification of criminals to prevent crime and to guarantee people's right to know. Such an atmosphere led to the approval of the revision of 'Special Law On the Punishment of Specific violent Crimes' in the National Assembly in April 2010. The revision allows the revelation of the profiles of crime suspects including the pictures of their faces at the investigation stage. However, whether the revision had been effective in preventing crime has not been demonstrated empirically. Moreover, identity revelation is a grave intrusion into privacy and an abuse of human rights such as personal rights and the right to a fair trial, since personal information of criminal suspects would be released to the media prior to the court's final judgements. Also it violates the principle of presumption of innocence, the principles of due process, the principle of double jeopardy, the principle of prohibition against excessive, the principles of clarity, and the principle of liability.

• Informatization Policy
• /
• v.18 no.1
• /
• pp.3-23
• /
• 2011

With the advent of the information era, the need to protect private information has increased rapidly. Theoretical answers to this problem in jurisprudence has been pursued in various ways over the last two decades. The purpose of this study is to find the types of human rights to information and provide directions for future studies by analyzing existing research materials. About 200 materials, including theses and dissertations produced from 1988 to the present have been collected and analysed. Lessons and implications for this study for the systematization of information rights are presented. I hope this study will contribute to future studies about information rights in jurisprudence.

• Proceedings of the Korea Contents Association Conference
• /
• 2013.05a
• /
• pp.185-186
• /
• 2013

2012년 8월 입양아의 인권을 보호하자는 취지에서 "입양특례법"이 개정돼 시행되고 있다. 개정된 "입양특례법"의 주된 핵심은 입양 아동의 인권 보호를 강화하기 위해 아동의 입양 여부를 가정법원이 최종 허가하도록 했다. 또 입양을 원하는 생모에게 숙려 기간을 7일간 갖도록 하고, 입양 기관은 양부모에게 아동 양육 교육을 하고, 아동 학대나 성폭력 등 범죄 경력도 조회하도록 규정하고 있다. 개정된 내용은 출산 전부터 생모의 입양 동의서와 친권포기 각서를 받아 입양을 진행시키는 과거신고제 입양의 단점을 보완하고 입양아의 출생에 관한 알 권리를 보장한다는 측면에서 의의가 크다 할 것이다. 그러나 개정 입양특례법 시행 후 우리 사회에서는 입양아의 권리 보호와 무질서한 해외입양 등을 예방하고자 하는 본래 취지와 다르게 영아 유기를 증가시키고 있고, 입양을 간절히 원하는 양부모들에게도 문제를 초래하고 있다는 문제점이 제기되고 있다. 본고에서는 개정 "입양특례법"의 내용과 문제점을 검토하여, 그 개선방안을 모색해보고자 한다.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.24
• /
• pp.1-31
• /
• 2010

This article aims to identify organizational factors that influence the performance of implementation of the U.S. Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) and to investigate the strength and direction of their effects. Explanatory variables include administrative resources, organizational culture, litigation cost, and the complexity of FOIA requests. The study will analyze quantitative secondary data from official statistics of federal agencies and the 2006 Federal Human Capital Survey as well as qualitative data from semi-structured interviews of FOIA officers. The results of statistical analyses are as follows : FOIA funding significantly affects median processing time and number of requests pending. There is a significant relationship between bureaucratic culture and number of requests pending, but not between bureaucratic culture and number of requests pending. There exists a significant relationship between the cost of FOIA litigation to federal agencies and the performance of FOIA implementation. There exists a significant relationship between the complexity of FOIA requests and the performance of FOIA implementation. This study also has important implication in South Korea, which has been under a sharp confrontation with North Korea for more than 50 years. As illustrated by the conflict between people's right to know and national security during the investigation of recent Sinking of the ROKS Cheonan, efforts should be made to prepare legal and institutional mechanism for freedom of information policy which can maintain a balance between conflicting values as well as efficient information disclosure in Korea.

• The Korean Journal of Archival Studies
• /
• no.59
• /
• pp.159-206
• /
• 2019

This study aims to analyze the details of the executive order of the president of the United States, which have been developed in the country's administrative system to institutionalize the guarantee of the people's right to know the classified records, as well as to protecting national secrets. This study also aims to present any implications for the development of the classified record management system of Korea. To this end, the previously issued EO concerning the classified records management were reviewed in terms of its classification, safeguard, and declassification. The analysis results showed that the EO by the president established and prescribed the special access program for national secrets, the system to exempt and suspend the automatic declassification, and the sanctions for protecting national secrets. The EO also established and prescribed the appointment system for the person with the authority to classify record, automatic declassification program, and Mandatory declassification review system, as well as the procedures for historical researcher and certain former government personal to access the classified records with the purpose of guaranteeing people's right to know. As a result, this study identified implications for the development of Korea's classified record management system, as follows : First, it is necessary to restructure the current classified record management system, by changing the operations that is dependent on the director of the National Intelligence Service to the one that is dependent on the President. Second, it is necessary to legislate a separate special law for the classified record management system. Third, a standing supervisory body should be established for the integrated management and for the consistent and routine supervision of the classified record management. Fourth, it is necessary to establish procedures to further review the classification of classified record to correct the defects of the current classification system, which has been abused and mismanaged by the national agencies and organizations that produce classified record.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.145-173
• /
• 2016

A patient's Right to Self-Determination or his/her Right of Autonomy in the Republic of Korea has traditionally been understood as being composed of two elements. The first, is the patient's Right to Know as it pertains to the physician's Duty to Report [the Medical Situation] to the patient; the second, is the patient's Right to Consent and Right of Refusal as it pertains to the physician's Duty to Inform [for Patient's Consent]. The legal and ethical positions pertaining to the patient's autonomous decision, particularly those in the interest of the patient's not wanting to know about his/her own body or medical condition, were therefore acknowledged as passively expressed entities borne from the patient's forfeiture of the Right to Know and Right to Consent, and exempting the physician from the Duty to Inform. The potential risk of adverse effects rising as a result of applying the Informed Consent Dogma to situations described above were only passively recognized, seen merely as a preclusion of the Informed Consent Dogma or a denial of liability on part of the physician. In short, the legal measures that guarantee a patient's 'Wish for Ignorance' are not currently being understood and acknowledged under the active positions of the patient's 'Right Not to Know' and the physician's 'Duty to Consideration' (such as the duty not to inform). Practical and theoretical issues arise absent the recognition of these active positions of the involved parties. The question of normative evaluation of cases where a sizable amount of harm has come up on the patient as a result of the physician explaining to or informing the patient of his/her medical condition despite the patient previously waiving the Right to Consent or exempting the physician from the Duty to Inform, is one that is yet to be addressed; that of ascertaining direct evidence/legal basis that can cement legality to situations where the physician foregoes the informing process under consideration that doing so may cause harm to the patient, is another. Therefore it is the position of this paper that the Right [Not to Know] and the Duty [to Consideration] play critical roles both in meeting the legal normative requirements pertaining to the enrichment of the patient's Right to Self-Determination and the prevention of adverse effects as it pertains to the provision of [unwanted] medical information.

• Electronics and Telecommunications Trends
• /
• v.12 no.6 s.48
• /
• pp.136-149
• /
• 1997

본고에서는 발명명세서의 질적향상을 도모하고 진보성에 대한 거절을 명세서 작성시부터 극복함을 통해 권리획득 기간을 줄이기 위하여 특허의 요건인 진보성에 대하여 그 개념파악과 특허청 심사실무를 검토하고 그 대책을 강구하였다. 결국, 출원 명세서의 내용이 목적, 구성, 효과 측면에서 목적의 특이성과 구성의 곤란성, 효과의 현저성이 진보성 있는 발명임을 고려하여 해당기술분야 통상의 지식을 가진 제3자가 용이하게 알 수 있도록 해야 하며, 선행기술을 조사 분석하여 인용예가 발생하지 않도록 주의를 기울여야 할 것이다.

• Journal of Korea Fair Competition Federation
• /
• no.100
• /
• pp.2-13
• /
• 2003

우리나라의 현실여건을 감안해본다면, 묵시적 가격협정 카르텔의 존재 입증에 있어서 경제적 증거의 역할은 상당히 제약적일 수밖에 없음을 알 수 있다. 특히 상고허가제를 실행함으로써 상고심의 대상이 되는 사건의 수를 사전에 제한하고 이에 따라 사건심리에 충분한 시간을 투자할 수 있는 미국 연방대법원과는 달리, 우리나라의 경우 국민의 재판받을 권리를 최대한 보장하기 위하여 대법원이 대부분의 상고사건을 받아들이고 이로 인해 과중한 업무량에 시달리고 있음을 고려한다면, 실무적으로 경제적 증거를 충분히 평가하기란 힘들 것으로 예상된다.