• Journal of Scientific & Technological Knowledge Infrastructure
• /
• s.9
• /
• pp.112-126
• /
• 2002

(고도 정보통신 네트워크 사회형성 기본법(통칭 : IT 기본법))의 기본 이념과 역할에 대하여 서술함과 동시에, 이것에 기초하여 고속 접근이 가능한 인터넷망을 정비하여 세계 최첨단의 (IT 국가)를 지향하는 (e-Japan 전략)에 대하여 살펴본다. 그리고 그것을 구체화하여, 고도 정보통신 네트워크 사회형성을 위해 정부가 신속하고도 중점적으로 실시해야 하는 시책의 전모를 명확하게 밝힌 (e-Japan 중점계획)의 세부사항에 대하여 법적 관련성을 중심으로 살펴본다. 또한 IT 사회에 있어서, 글로벌 네트워크 형성 및 이것을 이용한 전자상거래 등에 관해서는 국가간의 제휴.조정이 불가결하다는 인식을 기본으로 국제적인 IT법의 환경정비에 대해서 다루기로 한다.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.55-69
• /
• 2006

Electronic ticketing ("e-ticketing") through the internet will be the most critical commercial tool in the international airline industry. Actually the International Air Transport Association(IATA) has announced that it's goal is to accomplish 100 percent implementation of e-ticketing worldwide by 2007. Domestically e-ticketing will be put into operation in a full scale from the next year(2007). Thus, we count on, sooner or later, e-ticketing will be accomplished globally. As a legal aspect, this e-ticketing raises many legal issues which are no longer subject to a static set of legal rules driven by judicial precedent because e-ticketing is carried out on the "cyber space" which is a new and developing law area. In this treatise, I studied these legal issues, specially on the time and place(jurisdiction) of the contract which are the most important issues based on the New Montreal Convention signed at Montreal on May 28, 1999, which would seem prove that the airline industry is receptive and capable of change. Upon this opportunity, I hope the more comprehensive legal study on the e-ticketing will be introduced in the near future.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.133-141
• /
• 2013

After Presidential Declaration of Korea's Rights in the Surrounding Seas(Lee, Seung-Man Line), Japanese government objected to the Korean government's Declaration of the Peace Line. Japan didn't agree with Korean's ownership of Dokdo and has tried to develop the Dokdo issue into an international dispute and solved it by resorting the International Court of Justice(ICJ) since 1954. As mentioned before, ICJ doesn'thave the right of compulsory jurisdiction of ownership of Dokdo between Korea and Japan. Therefore, we don'thave to agree with Japan's suggestion of bringing a case to ICJ to solve the Dokdo issue. It is not the best way to maintain the international peace judging by ICJ as well. When Japan try to institute case unilaterally, We should remember that it is possible to give the expanding jurisdiction to the ICJ. It is the best way that solving the dispute of Dokdo is to establish the sovereignty over Dokdo while strengthen the control the Dokdo effectively. In conclusion, no matter how Japan claims ownership of Dokdo, it cannot be subject to negotiation.

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Marine Engineers Conference
• /
• 2005.11a
• /
• pp.90-91
• /
• 2005

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Marine Engineers Conference
• /
• 2006.06a
• /
• pp.129-132
• /
• 2006

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2009

A concept of Aircraft crime includes an Air range, unlawful seizure of aircraft and unlawful acts against the safety of civil aviation. There are international treaties and conventions which have mainly been enacted by ICAO. The following treaties and conventions are categorical and unconditional norms that any States are clearly condemned. Convention on Offences and Certain other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft, Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft, Convention for the suppression of unlawful acts against the safety of civil aviation, Protocol for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts of Violence at Airports Serving International Civil Aviation, Convention on the Marking of Plastic Explosives for the Purpose of Detection In this essay, I present the meaning of the aircraft crime mentioned on the treaties above and jurisdiction of the crime. Moreover, I explain how to demand reparation for damages onboard or on the surface when an aircraft crime is occurred. Lastly, I indicate legal bases of how to protect the victims of the aircraft crime by mentioning specific cases relating to the crime.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2013.06a
• /
• pp.288-290
• /
• 2013

해양안전심판제도는 해양사고의 원인을 밝혀 해양안전에 이바지함을 목적으로 하고 있음에도, 실질적으로 원인조사보다는 징계를 주목적으로 하는 것처럼 보일 수 있다. 해양사고가 발생하였을 경우, 지방해양안전심판원은 원인재결 및 징계재결을 하는데, 해기사나 도선사에게 징계재결을 하면 이는 침익적인 행정처분에 해당된다. 이러한 행정처분에 다툼이 있을 경우 중앙해양안전심판원에 구제를 요청하면 행정심판이 된다. 행정심판의 재결에 대하여 다시 대법원에서 다투는 것이 행정소송이 된다. 일반적으로, 행정심판의 재결은 3심제의 재판을 받을 수 있으나, 해양안전심판제도에서 중앙해양안전심판원의 재결에 대한 행정소송은 대법원 전속관할 단심제로 운영되고 있어 헌법의 기본권 중의 하나인 재판청구권에 대한 위헌 논란이 계속되고 있으므로, 이 논문에서는 해양안전심판제도의 본래의 목적인 해양사고 원인규명을 통한 해상안전의 확보 및 징계재결로 인한 침해된 국민의 권리를 구제하기 위한 개선방안을 제안하고자 한다.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.139-161
• /
• 2009

The idea of establishing an International Court of Air and Space Law (hereinafter referred to ICASL) is only my academic and practical opinion as first proposal in the global community. The establishment of the International Court of Air and Space Law can promote the speed and promote fairness of the trial in air and space law cases. The creation of an ICASL would lead to strengthening of the international cooperation deemed essential by the global community towards joint settlement in the transnational air and space cases, claims and would act as a catalyst for the efforts and solution on aircraft, satellite and space shuttle's accidents and cases and all manpower, information, trial and lawsuit to be centrally managed in an independent fashion to the benefit of global community. The aircraft, satellite and spacecraft's accidents attributes to the particular and different features between the road, railway and maritime's accidents. These aircraft, satellite and spacecraft's accidents have incurred many disputes between the victims and the air and space carriers in deciding on the limited or unlimited liability for compensation and the appraisal of damages caused by the aircraft's accidents, terror attack, satellite, space shuttle's accidents and space debris. This International Court of Air and Space Law could hear any claim growing out of both international air and space crash accidents and transnational accidents in which plaintiffs and defendants are from different nations. This alternative would eliminate the lack of uniformity of decisions under the air and space conventions, protocols and agreements. In addition, national courts would no longer have to apply their own choice of law analysis in choosing the applicable liability limits or un-limit for cases that do not fall under the air and space system. Thus, creation of an International Court of Air and Space Law would eliminate any disparity of damage awards among similarly situated passengers and shippers in nonmembers of air and space conventions, protocols, agreements and cases. Furthermore, I would like to explain the main items of the abovementioned Draft for the Convention or Statute of the International Court of Air and Space Law framed in comparison with the Statute of the International Court of Justice, the Statue of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Statute of the International Criminal Court. First of all, in order to create the International Court of Air and Space Law, it is necessary for us to legislate a Draft for the Convention on the Establishment of the International Court of Air and Space Law. This Draft for the Convention must include the elected method of judges, term, duty and competence of judge, chambers, jurisdiction, hearing and judgment of the ICASL. The members of the Court shall be elected by the General Assembly and Council of the ICAO and by the General Assembly and Legal Committee of the UNCOPUOS from a list of persons nominated by the national groups in the six continent (the North American, South American, African, Oceania and Asian Continent) and two international organization such as ICAO and UNCOPUOS. The members of the Court shall be elected for nine years and may be re-elected as one time. However, I would like to propose a creation an International Court of Air and Space Law in extending jurisdiction to the International Court of Justice at the Hague to in order to decide the air and space convention‘s cases. My personal opinion is that if an International Court on Air and Space Law will be created in future, it will be settled quickly and reasonably the difficulty and complicated disputes, cases or lawsuit between the wrongdoer and victims and the injured person caused by aircraft, satellite, spacecraft's accidents or hijacker and terrorists etc. on account of deciding the standard of judgment by judges of that’s court. It is indeed a great necessary and desirable for us to make a new Draft for the Convention on a creation of the International Court of Air and Space Law to handle international air and space crash litigation. I shall propose to make a new brief Draft for the Convention on the Creation of an International Court of Air and Space Law in the near future.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2016

The United States Constitution gives power to the federal district courts to hear admiralty cases. 28 U.S.C. §.133, which states that "The district courts shall have original jurisdiction, exclusive of the Courts of the States, of any civil case of admiralty or maritime jurisdiction." However, the determination of whether a case is about admiralty or maritime so that triggers admiralty jurisdiction was not a simple question. Through numerous legal precedents, the courts have drawn a line to clarify the boundary of admiralty cases. This unique jurisdiction is not determined by the mere involvement of a vessel in the case or even by the occurrence of an event on a waterway. As a general rule, a case is within admiralty jurisdiction if it arises from an accident on the navigable waters of the United States (locus test) and involves some aspect of maritime commerce (nexus test). With regarding to the maritime nexus requirement, the US Supreme Court case, Executive Jet Aviation, Inc. v. City of Cleveland, held that federal courts lacked admiralty jurisdiction over an aviation tort claim where a plane during a flight wholly within the US crashed in Lake Erie. Although maritime locus was present, the Court excluded admiralty jurisdiction because the incident was "only fortuitously and incidentally connected to navigable waters" and bore "no relationship to traditional maritime activity." However, this historical case left a milestone question: whether an aircraft disaster occurred on navigable water triggers the admiralty jurisdiction, only for the reason that it was for international transportation? This article is to explore the meaning of admiralty jurisdiction over aviation accidents at US courts. Given that the aircraft engaged in transportation of passenger and goods as the vessels did in the past, the aviation has been linked closely with the traditional maritime activities. From this view, this article reviews a decision delivered by the Seventh Circuit regarding the aviation accident occurred on July 6, 2013 at San Francisco International Airport.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.26 no.10
• /
• pp.147-155
• /
• 2021

If one wants to file a lawsuit against the administrative office, he or she should decide whether to file a civil lawsuit or an administrative lawsuit. The type of lawsuit must be determined to determine which court to file the lawsuit with. Korea seems to have a clear distinction between administrative and judicial legal relationships, but it is not easy to distinguish between public and judicial cases unless the public and judicial discrimination are maintained. The practice or precedent of litigation is always difficult to distinguish because the litigation is based on the discrimination of whether the litigation belongs to a legal relationship in public law or judicial law. I believe that if the administrative litigation law establishes a provision related to the designation of a duty and stipulates that "if a litigation case is questioned whether it is an administrative or civil lawsuit, the Supreme Court-related court shall designate the competent court at the request of the parties," the lower court will be guaranteed the right to swift a trial, and the legal representatives will be freed from the exhaustive agony.