• Proceedings of the Korean Professional Engineer Association Conference
• /
• 1992.12a
• /
• pp.133-136
• /
• 1992

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.3 no.2
• /
• pp.261-280
• /
• 2001

From the IMF(International Monetary fund) crisis, the management conditions of the trading company which run business in world market, has rapidly changed. In particular, the trading conglomerate's competitive power have declined. This study, addressing such changes, intend to analyze what factors are that have generated this changes in trading conglomerate's environment. The study specifically takes it into account that the differences between Korea trading company and Japan's. This research was confirmed by data and field survey in two country. The results of research are summarized as follow. The Korean trading company are inferior to the Japanese trading company in total volume(Korea: 24.1, Japan 100), the benefit volume(Korea: 8.7, Japan 100), the stability of turnover(Korea: 36.6, Japan 100), the network power in foreign country(Korea: 19.2, Japan 100), the power of e-business(Korea: 17.0, Japan 100). But the debt ratio of Korea company is significantly lower than that of Japan's(Korea: 160.4%, Japan 940.5%). In conclusion, providing that the Korean trading company want to be a world-class champion in trading field, they have to introduce the new management strategies which means the high-profit base trading, the long term investment and the internet business.

• The Optical Journal
• /
• v.12 no.2 s.66
• /
• pp.12-14
• /
• 2000

올 해 35mm 카메라 시장 규모는 전년에 비해서 소폭 성장할 것으로 전망되나, 일본업체들의 본격적인 마케팅과, 삼성카메라의 적극적인 수성 지키기, LG상사의 의욕적인 카메라 사업 참여 등으로 업체별 경쟁은 더욱 치열할 것으로 예상된다. 디지털카메라 시장은 130만$\~$200만 이상의 고화소 제품을 중심으로 시장이 형성되고, 시장규모도 급속한 성장을 거듭하면서 200억 이상이 될 것으로 예상된다.

• Proceedings of the Plant Resources Society of Korea Conference
• /
• 2019.10a
• /
• pp.21-21
• /
• 2019

백양꽃(Lycoris koreana)이 속해 있는 상사화속(Lycoris)은 종간 잡종이 쉽게 일어나 많은 자연교잡종을 가지고 있어 식물의 종분화와 진화를 연구하는데 흥미로운 분류군이다. 그러나 이런 사유로 명백한 분류학적 차이가 있음에도 불구하고 대상종의 분류학적 위치의 설정에 문제가 발생되어 계급의 설정에 혼란을 가져오기도 한다. 특히 한국산 상사화속의 종 분류는 그동안 많은 형태학적, 분계학적, 화분학적, 세포학적, 분자생물학적 연구가 이루어져 있음에도 아직도 도감과 많은 문헌에서 오류와 오동정의 문제점을 가지고 있다. 특히 백양꽃에 대하여서는 Nakai에 의해 신종으로 설정된 이래 일본에 분포하는 동 속 식물과의 관계 분석의 오류로 계급의 설정에 현재까지 다양한 문제가 발생되고 있다. 백양꽃은 전라남도 백양산에 분포하고, 포가 자주색이고, 꽃의 크기가 작으며, 화사와 화주가 적색 또는 암적색인 특징으로 Nakai에 의해 신종으로 설정되었다. 이후 Nakai와 Lee는 L. koreana 가 한국에만 분포하는 것으로 보고 한국 특산종으로 취급하였다. 그러나 백양꽃의 실체에 대하여 많은 논의가 있었으나 Lee and Oh는 L. radiata로 동정하였고, Yang은 L. koreana는 한국에 분포하지 않고 L. sanguinea만이 분포하는 것으로 보고하였다. Koyama는 L. sanginea에 대하여 L. sanguinea와 L. kuishiana를 비교하여 수술이 화관 밖으로 돌출되어 있는 점 외에는 L. koreana와 차이가 없음을 들어 각각 L. sanguinea var. sanguinea, L. sanguinea var. kuishiana 그리고 L. sanguinea var. koreana로 재설정 하였고 이는 한국과 일본학자들에 의해서도 거의 받아들여지고 있으나 본 연구를 통하여 L. koreana의 종(species)으로의 계급 부여와 한국특산식물 설정의 타당한 결과를 도출하였다.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.25-46
• /
• 2010

In spite of great interest and recent innovation of the legislative system in the Arbitration and other Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) system, In Japan there have been only a few case in which International commercial dispute was settled through the Arbitration compared to other countries. However, we can easily expect that foreign arbitral awards which need to be recognized and enforced in Japan will gradually increase and this makes it very important for us to review the Japanese legislative system regarding recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. In this paper, I focused on the relations between applicable laws(including convention) regarding recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Japan and some issues concerning refusal of recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Japan is a member state of several multilateral conventions concerning recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards including the New York Convention of 1958 and at least 20 bilateral agreements which include provisions in relate to the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. Therefore there are some legal issues about the priority application between multilateral and bilateral agreements in relate to Article 7(1) of the New York Convention. In Japan, as I mentioned in this paper, there are incoherent opinions concerning this issue. To solve it substantially it would seem appropriate to build up concrete and explicit provisions concerning the application of priority between multilateral and bilateral agreements. On the other hand, in relate to the application between the New York Convention and National Law, it is necessary to take general approach regarding the priority application between Convention (Treaty) and National Law, considering the national application of conventions under the Constitutional System of each country. Among the grounds for non-recognition/enforcement, there are the ones that are decided under the law of the requested country, for instance, arbitrability and public policy. It would therefore be possible that some foreign arbitral awards would not be recognized in Japan especially relating to the arbitrability because its scope in Japan is not so large. Regarding the enforcement of awards annulled in their place of origin, some positive opinions in recent Japanese legal discussions, say that annulled awards should be enforced as a counter strategy of developed countries and judiciary discretion of the requested country would be needed. As mentioned in this paper, the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards is closely related to judicial policy of the requested country as the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment is. Even though there existed uniform rules on recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards like the New York convention, each country has different internal legal status of conventions under its own Constitutional System and tends to interpret the provisions based in its own profit. Therefore, it is necessary to review, in the light of conflict of laws, the national legislative system including legal status of conventions of the requested countries concerning recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.55-85
• /
• 1998

Each of China, Taiwan, Japan and Korea is in international trade one of the major countries in Asia and has been influenced by the Chinese character culture and the Civil law system. All these countries have their own commercial dispute resolution system for international trade dispute and commercial arbitration mechanism in their countries. They are making their own effort to internationalize and improve their commercial arbitration system. Among these countries China enacted a new arbitration law already. At that time Chinese arbitration law was referred to the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration for internationalization of Chinese commercial arbitration system. China also internationalized the panel of arbitrators by increasing the foreign arbitrators of the panel of arbitrators of CIETAC. These measures adopted by China will be the model of dispute resolution and the commercial arbitration system in other major countries in Asia.

• Korean Journal of Poultry Science
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.105-127
• /
• 1989

Although poultry industry in Japan has been much developed in recent years, it still needs to be developed , compared with developed countries. Since the poultry market in Korea is expected to be opened in the near future it is necessary to maximize the Productivity to reduce the production costs and to develop the scientific, technologies and management organization systems for the improvement of the quality in poultry production. Followings ale the summary of poultry industry in Japan. 1. Poultry industry in Japan is almost specized and commercialized and its management system is ： integrated, cooperative and developed to industrialized intensive style. Therefore, they have competitive power in the international poultry markets. 2. Average egg weight is 48-50g per day (Max. 54g) and feed requirement is 2. 1-2. 3. 3. The management organization system is specialized and farmers in small scale form complex and farmers in large scale are integrated.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.41
• /
• pp.293-319
• /
• 2009

This paper aims to find the differences between the trading company of Korea and Japan, by analyzing the development history of Corporate Governance and Internal Control System in Korea and Japan. And this paper studies about that on the legal site. A corporate governance has the tremendous influence on the value of the company, and a company's system of internal control has a key role in the management of risks that are significant to the fulfillment of its business objectives. On the other hand, many companies in the every industry have suffered several times from fatal loss or damage resulted from miss or malfeasance late in the 20th century. And the result of that, starting the Sarbanese-Oxley Act in America, a government established the financial laws and corporate laws in the a lot of countries including Korea and Japan. Japanese trading companies tend to be taking a serious view of internal control more than corporate governance against Korean trading companies. But this not means that Japanese are superior to Korean. The most important thing is the fact that Korean trading companies have to spend enough time finding suitable system of corporate governance and internal control as Japanese trading companies did.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.47-64
• /
• 2015

Pursuant to Article 109(1) of the Attorney-at-Law Act of Korea, a person, not an attorney-at-law, who receives or promises to receive money, articles, entertainment or other benefits or who gives or promises to give those things to a third party, in compensation for providing or mediating legal services, such as examination, representation, arbitration(emphasis added), settlement, solicitation, legal consultation, making of legal documents, etc. shall be punished by imprisonment with prison labor for not more than 7 years or by a fine not exceeding KRW 50 million or may be punished by both and there is no specific provision on qualification of arbitrator except on nationality of an arbitrator in the Arbitration Act of Korea. Then, the question arises, can any non-lawyer arbitrator who receives arbitrator's fees be punished in accordance with the Attorney-at-Law Act in Korea? To search for an answer for this matter, this paper examines the Arbitration Act or the Civil Procedure Code of 33 major countries in the world and explains a research on the participation ratio of non-lawyer arbitrators in all 360 arbitration cases registered in 2012 at the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB).

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.28 no.2
• /
• pp.217-248
• /
• 2018

This paper reviews the Supreme Court of Japan in Decision of December 12, 2017, 2016 (Kyo) 43 (2011) concerning arbitrator's duty of disclosure and reasonable investigation under the Japan Arbitration Act (Arbitration Act). The Supreme Court of Japan recently issued a precedential decision interpreting, for the first time, the arbitrator disclosure requirements of the Arbitration Act. Under Article 18(4) of the Arbitration Act, arbitrators have an ongoing obligation to disclose circumstances which may give rise to justifiable doubts as to their impartiality or independence. The Supreme Court held that Article 18(4) of the Arbitration Act - requiring arbitrators to disclose all "facts likely to give rise to doubts as to his/her impartiality or independence" - (1) is not satisfied by blanket disclosures or advance waivers of potential future conflicts, and (2) requires disclosure of facts both known to an arbitrator or "that can be normally ascertained by an investigation that is reasonably possible${\cdots}$" This new standard presents opportunities and challenges for enforcing arbitration awards in Japan, and suggests measures that both arbitrators and parties can use to protect their awards. Also, the Supreme Court's new standards for evaluating arbitrator conflict disclosures suggest some measures that both arbitrators and parties to arbitration in Japan can take to protect the enforceability of their awards. The key factual question posed by the Supreme Court's ruling was whether an arbitrator's conflicts check was reasonable. Maintaining records regarding a review of potential conflicts or any investigation provides a ready source of proof in case of a future challenge. The Supreme Court has spoken clearly that so-called advance waivers of potential conflicts are not effective under Japanese law. Instead, to the extent that potential conflicts arise during the course of arbitration, they should be specifically disclosed.