• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.1 no.2
• /
• pp.273-294
• /
• 1999

인터넷은 단순히 통신수단의 변화에 그치지 않고 문화 사회 정치의 각 방면에서 커다란 변혁을 불러일으키고 있으며, 물품매매계약이 전자적으로 이루어지는 경우 전자상거래계약의 성립시기, 방식 및 전자문서의 효력, 준거법(applicable law, governing law), 재판관할(jurisdiction)등에 관하여 복잡 다양한 문제점들을 야기하게 된다. 전자상거래 계약상에서 청약의 기준에 관해서는 매도인의 행위를 청약으로 보는 것이 다수설이다. 따라서 매수인이 선돼한 상품에 대하여 구입의사를 표시, 즉 승낙하면 바로 전자상거래 계약이 성립한다고 할 수 있다. 그리고 인터넷을 이용한 전자상거래의 경우에는 국경을 초월하여 세계의 모든 소비자들을 그 대상으로 함으로써 준거법의 문제와 재판관할권의 문제가 상당히 중요한 문제로 부각되고 있는 바, 준거법의 결정은 일반적으로 당사자의 자유로운 의사에 따라 결정된다. 재판관할권에 대해서는 재판관할에 대한 합의가 있는 경우에 우려 나라는 이를 유효한 것으로 인정하고 있으나, 일반 소비자들을 대상으로 하고 있는 전자상거래의 특성을 고려할 때 이는 다소 무리가 따른다고 생각된다. 또한 재판관할에 대한 합의가 없는 경우에는 피고의 주소지국이 재판관할권을 부여받는바, 격지자간의 소액거래에서는 그 실익을 기대할 수 없는 것이 현실이다.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.44
• /
• pp.487-538
• /
• 2013

It is the most critical issue in recent international intellectual property licence disputes to decide the applicable laws to the license contracts. As Korea and the European Union(EU) reached free trade agreement(FTA), and the EU-Korea FTA entered into force on July 1, 2011, the FTA has boosted social, economic, cultural exchanges between the two. As a result of the increased transactions in those sectors, legal disputes are also expected to grow. This situation calls for extensive research and understanding of the choice of law principles applicable to international intellectual property license contracts in the EU. To decide the laws applicable to issues arising from international intellectual property license contracts disputes, the characterization of those issues is necessary for the purpose of applying private international law principles to them. In terms of characterization, intellectual property license contracts fall within contractual matters. In the EU, the primary rule of choice of law principles in contractual obligations is the Rome I Regulation. Because the choice of law rules, such as private international law principles, the Rome Convention(1980), and the Rome I Regulation, differ in the time of application, it is essential to clarify the time factor of related contracts. For example, the Rome I Regulation applies to contracts which were concluded as from December 17, 2009. Although party autonomy in international contracts disputes is generally allowed, if there is no choice of law agreement between the parties to the contracts, the objective test rule of private international law doctrine could be the best option. Following this doctrine, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 1 provides the governing law rules based on the types of contracts, but there is no room for intellectual property license contracts. After all, as the rule for governing law of those contracts, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 2 should be applied and if there are countries which are more closely connected to the contracts under the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 3, the laws of those countries become the governing laws of the contracts. Nevertheless, if it is not possible to decide the applicable laws to the license contracts, the Rome I Regulation Article 4, Paragraph 4 should be applied in the last resort and the laws of the countries which are the most closely connected to the contracts govern the license contracts. Therefore, this research on the laws applicable to intellectual property license contracts under the Rome I Regulation suggests more systematic and effective solutions for future disputes in which Korea and the EU countries play the significant role as the connecting factors in the conflict of laws rules. Moreover, it helps to establish comprehensive and theoretical understanding of applying the Korean Private International Law to multifarious choice-of-law cases.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.3-30
• /
• 2022

On 27 October the Supreme Court of UK handed down its much anticipated decision in Kabab-Ji SAL (Lebanon) v Kout Food Group (Kuwait) [2021] UKSC 48. The issues for the Supreme Court to decide were as follows: (1) which law governed the validity of the arbitration agreement; (2) if English law applied, whether, as a matter of English law, there was any real prospect that a court might find that KFG became a party to the arbitration agreement, and (3) whether, procedurally, the Court of Appeal was correct in giving summary judgment refusing recognition and enforcement the award, or whether there should have been a full rehearing of whether there was a valid and binding arbitration agreement for the purposes of the New York Convention and the AA 1996 (the 'procedural' issue) The decision in Kabab-Ji provides further reassuring clarity on how the governing law of the arbitration agreement is to be determined under English law where the governing law is not expressly stated in the arbitration agreement itself. The Supreme Court's reasoning is consistent with its earlier decision on the same issue, albeit in the context of enforcement pursuant to the New York Convention, rather than considering the arbitration agreement before an award is rendered. This paper presents some implications of Kabab-Ji case. Also, it seeks to provide a meaningful discussion and theories on the arbitration system in Korea.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.85-108
• /
• 2023

In international commercial arbitrations that arise from an international commercial contract, arbitral tribunals ruling on the merits of the arbitration apply the law governing the contract. The parties to contract are free to designate the law under the principle of parties autonomy. This paper examines this principle under the Korean Arbitration Act, and makes some legislative suggestions. For this purpose, this paper first discusses what is the scope of matters covered by the law governing the contract, what are the rules of conflict-of-laws for determining the law governing the contract, and what happens when the arbitral tribunal incorrectly applies the law governing the contract? Then, this paper further goes to examine issues such as the form of choice-of-law agreement, the explicit or implicit choice of law, the parties' ability to choose the rules of law including lex mercatoria, the change of choice-of-law agreement, the independence of choice-of-law clause.

• Management & Information Systems Review
• /
• v.7
• /
• pp.451-462
• /
• 2001

국제물품매매계약은 당사자간의 합의에 의해서 이루어진다. 그러나 국제간의 물품매매에 관련하여 모든 상황을 특정계약에 반영하는데는 한계가 있다. 따라서 특정계약에 대한 해석과 판단의 기준이 되는 하나의 보편적이며 합리성에 기초를 둔 준거법이 필요하게 된다. 이러한 준거법은 어느 특정국가의 사범으로 충분할 수도 있지만 국제거래가 안전하고 원활하게 실행되기 위해서는 그것이 세계 어느 나라에 있어서도 같은 내용의 통일적인 법에 의하여 규율되는 것이 바람직하다. 특히 경제적 합리성에 기초를 둔 거래법의 분야에서는 이론적으로 법의통일은 가능하며 실제적으로는 로마의 사법통일협회(UNIDROIT)나 국제연합 국제상거래위원회(UNIDROIT)에 의하여 지금까지 어느 정도 통일사법 제정의 필요성이 꾸준히 제기 되어 왔다. 이러한 목적을 수행하기 위하여 UNICITRAL(국제연합 국제상거래위원회)이 1980년에 발표한 국제물품매매계약에 관한 UN 조약-비엔나협약(CISG)은 국제간의 물품매매에 관한 계약법으로서 중요한 역할을 수행하고 있다. 비엔나협약(CISG)의 법리적인 근거는 "자주적인 준거법의 제정 및 그 적용상의 통일성"에 있다는 것이다. 또한 그 내용을 보면 첫째, 지역적 의미를 가지는 법률용어의 사용을 피하고 대신 격지간의 계약시 실제로 발생하는 현실적 사례의 관점에서 법안을 작성하고자 하였고 둘째, 그 내용을 달리하고 있는 각국의 사법을 통일하는 것에 의해 모든 사법적 법률관계에 같은 내용의 사법을 적용하는 방법, 즉 세계통일사법의 제정이라 하겠다. 본 연구는 비엔나협약(CISG)의 입법취지와 배경을 고찰하였으며 또한 통일사법으로서 협약상의 "일반원칙의 통용"을 계약성립(Formation of Contract)의 과정별로 정리하였다.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.58
• /
• pp.99-124
• /
• 2013

International commercial arbitration is a specially formed mechanism for the final and binding settlement of disputes arisen between contracting parties regarding procedures, structures or other contractual relationship agreed by them. It is a resolution system which is processed autonomously by arbitrators who are appointed by contracting parties without involving the national court. If the contracting parties want to settle their disputes by arbitration, there must be a valid agreement. With a valid agreement, the most important concern is which law(called as the substantive law) should be applied in order to determine the rights and obligations of both contracting parties in relation to the dispute. At this point, the substantive law is really important because it is applied to the dispute itself directly during proceedings as well as it plays an crucial role in scrutiny and enforcement of arbitral awards. This article discusses about the substantive law under international commercial arbitration, specially focusing on the regulations of the ICC rules of arbitration, which is the most widely used all over the world and UNCITRAL Model law, which most countries' rule and laws are based on. By discussing how these rules and regulations should be interpreted and applied, it is expected to provide practical help to practitioners when they agree on an arbitration agreement.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.41 no.5
• /
• pp.15-39
• /
• 2016

Over the past couple of decades, we can see the emergence of a new lex mercatoria. It consists of international conventions or treaty, model laws and international principles. And such new lex mercatoria is driven by the international institutions such as UNCITRAL, UNIDROIT and ICC. The international convention and international principles in the field of international commercial transaction are considered : UN Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods(CISG) and The UNIDROIT Principles(PICC Principles). The former is the statue law for the latter, and the latter sometimes supports the former as an interpretation and supplementation of CISG. So, the purpose of this article is to evaluate and investigate the current status of CISG and PICC Principles in terms of application and interpretation principles. The results are as follows. First, PICC are used for the interpretation and supplementation of international law such as CISG, but CISG is a law, not a rule. Second, CISG and PICC Principles are not often chosen when parties chose the law governing their contract. The parties very often chose a national law ; the number of the parties choosing CISG and PICC Principles as a governing law was very low.

• Journal of vocational education research
• /
• v.29 no.3
• /
• pp.157-185
• /
• 2010

This study aims to develop a process-oriented evaluation criteria that can be applied during the collection, description, and the provision of information necessary to improving and sustaining the cyber education program for human resource development. The conclusion obtained in the study is as described below. First, the process-oriented evaluation criteria of cyber education program for human resource development was divided into 4 dimensions, 13 evaluation categories, 29 evaluation sub-categories, and 125 evaluation clauses. Secondly, the process-oriented evaluation criteria of cyber education program for human resource development was divided into 4 dimensions, 13 evaluation categories, 29 evaluation sub-categories, and 125 evaluation clauses through the Delphi research method. Thirdly, the contents validity ratio (CVR) of each clauses ranged between .31-1.00 and therefore can be said to be valid. Also, the Cronbach's credibility for the validity of the developed evaluation criteria scored .980.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.16 no.3
• /
• pp.3-22
• /
• 2006

이 논문은 지난 10월 26일 및 27일 양일간에 걸쳐 서울의 Grand Intercontinental Hotel에서 개최된 국제중재학술대회 ICC/KCAB/KOCIA Conference에서 발표된 것으로 외국 변호사들의 이해를 돕기 위해 우리나라 중재법의 주요 내용을 설명하되, 특히 뉴욕협약과 국제상사중재에 관한 유엔모범법과 차이가 있는 부분을 주로 설명하였다. 이 논문은 우리나라 중재법이 규율하는 분야 중에서 그 적용범위, 중재적격, 통지의 서면성, 중재합의의 형식, 중간구제조치의 집행, 중재의 준거법 및 중재인의 선정 등에 관하여 설명하였다. 또한 이 논문은 우리나라가 일본, 중국 및 우리나라를 포함하는 동북아무역과 관련한 분쟁에서 중재의 중심지가 되어야 할 것을 역설하고, 이를 위해서 우리나라 유일의 중재기관인 대한상사중재원이 중재인 및 사무국 분야에서 개선이 필요함을 주장하였다.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.197-224
• /
• 2005

The purpose of this paper is to make research on the party's autonomy principle and the applicable law to the arbitration agreement, the applicable law to the validity of the arbitration agreement, the applicable law to the arbitrability of the arbitration agreement, the applicable law to the contracting ability of the arbitration agreement, and the applicable law to the method of the arbitration agreement. If no choice of law is made by the parties with respect to the arbitration agreement-which is the stand situation-the validity of the agreement may have to decided under its proper law, or under the law of the place of arbitration, or the law of the place of enforcement. If the subject matter is not arbitrable, the arbitration agreement remains without effect. The rules determining arbitrability may differ from one country to another, from one legal system to another. If a party is lacking capacity to enter into an arbitration agreement, the recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award may be refused at the request of the party against whom it is invoked. This principle is laid down in the New Yark Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. The validity of an arbitration agreement sometimes also depends on the form in which it is made. Article II. 2 of the New York Convention states that the term 'agreement in writing' shall include an arbitral clause in a contract or an arbitration agreement, signed by the parties of contained in exchange of letters or telegrams.