• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.17
• /
• pp.55-89
• /
• 2003

What are the international aviation regimes? It is said that they are sets of principles, norms, rules, and decision-making procedures of international aviation around which aviation actors' (states-actors, intergovernmental aviation organization, international aviation conventions, airlines and their organizations etc.) expectations converge in a given aviation issue-area for the purposes of the human welfare and the operations of the stable civil aviation. In this regards, the purposes of this study are focused on the aviation actors' shifts. Chronologically, international aviation regimes have been developed by some stages as followings; The 1st stage is the period from 1944 Chicago Convention to 1978 US Deregulation Act, when the aviation regulations and rules within the international aviation relations were implemented by Chicago-Bermuda regimes as Christer Jonsson pointed out. In this first stage, the sovereignty for the airspace over their countries is absolute. The second stage is the period from 1978 to '1992 Open Skies Agreement' between US and Netherlands. In this regime, airlines' activities as well as state-actors' have been actuated. The third stage is the period from 1992 to the contemporary. In this stage, airlines' activities for the consumers such as 'Open Skies Agreements', 'e-commerce business', 'airspace open policy within EU area', 'service open policy of WTO', and 'airlines' strategic alliance' are the central focal points in the world aviation relationship. In the conclusion, this phenomenon of the core actors in the international aviation rules has been shifted from the states-actors to the non-states actors especially, operating airlines, or consuming customers. Finally, I' d like to suggest that international aviation regimes should be developed to promote and facilitate the globalized level for the people's movements among the global aviation society. That is the way to proceed to the welfare and peace for all human beings of the World.

• The Journal of Korean Academy of Prosthodontics
• /
• v.53 no.2
• /
• pp.105-110
• /
• 2015

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the 3 dimensional accuracy of impression taking on the newly developed healing abutment and impression coping combined system comparing conventional pick-up type impression. Materials and methods: For 10 patients who had a single missing tooth on molar area, dental implants (SuperLine; Dentium, Seoul, Korea) were placed and healing abutment (MyHealing; Raphabio Co., Seoul, Korea) abutments were connected. After 3 months, transfer type impression with MyHealing and pick-up type impression with impression coping were performed twice in the same patients, and master models were fabricated. Customized prosthetic abutments (Myplant; Raphabio Co., Seoul, Korea) were milled and connected to the master casts. Through a dental scanner (Scanner S600; Zirkonzahn, South Tyrol, Italy), the master casts were converted into virtual casts. The length and angulation differences between casts were measured using 3 dimentional analysis program (Geomagic Qualify 12; Geomagic, Morrisville, NC, USA). Statistical significance was calculated using Kruskal Wallis test and Mann-Whitney U test (${\alpha}$=.05). Results: The length differences between the two systems were 0.032 mm in sagittal plane, and 0.029 in coronal plane, and 0.023 mm in horizontal plane. The angulation differences were $0.755^{\circ}$ in sagittal plane, and $1.275^{\circ}$ in coronal plane, and $0.420^{\circ}$ in horizontal plane. Conclusion: The accuracy of newly developed healing abutment system is similar to that of conventional pick-up impression. The new system can reduces chair time by not using separate impression coping.

• Journal of Dental Rehabilitation and Applied Science
• /
• v.39 no.1
• /
• pp.32-44
• /
• 2023

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of implant connection type on marginal bone loss (MBL) and to analyze the factors that affect MBL. This study focuses on single implants planted in the upper and lower first molar area. Materials and Methods: A total of 87 implants from 68 patients were tracked for a period over 5 years. There were 57 external connection type (EC) implants and 30 internal connection type (IC) implants in 38 males and 30 females. The MBL and EA were measured from intraoral radiograph images taken after 5 years at most. Results: Significant difference in MBL between EC and IC type was observed in patients without GBR or diabetes. Patients without GBR exhibited an MBL of -0.065 ± 0.859 mm in EC type and -0.627 ± 0.639 mm in IC type (P = 0.025). Using multiple regression analysis, a statistically significant negative correlation was observed between MBL and conditions including implant-abutment connection type (β = -0.303), diabetes (β = -0.113), emergence angle > 30° (β = -0.234), and age (β = -0.776). Conclusion: Within this results, IC type implants had less MBL than EC type, and implant prosthesis with emergence angle over 30° showed greater MBL. To minimize the MBL of the implant and ensure implant stability, careful consideration should be given to the EA of implant prosthesis and its connection type.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.427-468
• /
• 2015

To date, we have considered the theoretical views, the standpoint of states and the discourse within the international community such as the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space(COPUOS) regarding the Air/Outer Space Boundary Question which is one of the first issues of UN COPUOS established in line with marking the starting point of Outer Space Area. As above mentioned, discussions in the United Nations and among scholars of within each state regarding the delimitation issue often saw a division between those in favor of a functional approach (the functionalists) and those seeking the delineation of a boundary (the spatialists). The spatialists emphasize that the boundary between air and outer space should be delimited because the status of outer space is a type of public domain from which sovereign jurisdiction is excluded, as stated in Article 2 of Outer Space Treaty. On the contrary art. I of Chicago Convention is evidence of the acknowledgement of sovereignty over airspace existing as an international customary law, has the binding force of which exists independently of the Convention. The functionalists, backed initially by the major space powers, which viewed any boundary demarcation as possibly restricting their access to space, whether for peaceful or non-military purposes, considered it insufficient or inadequate to delimit a boundary of outer space without obvious scientific and technological evidences. Last more than 50 years there were large development in the exploration and use of outer space. But a large number states including those taking the view of a functionalist have taken on a negative attitude. As the element of location is a decisive factor for the choice of the legal regime to be applied, a purely functional approach to the regulation of activities in the space above the Earth does not offer a solution. It seems therefore to welcome the arrival of clear evidence of a growing recognition of and national practices concerning a spatial approach to the problem is gaining support both by a large number of States as well as by publicists. The search for a solution to the problem of demarcating the two different legal regimes governing the space above Earth has undoubtedly been facilitated and a number of countries including Russia have already advocated the acceptance of the lowest perigee boundary of outer space at a height of 100km. As a matter of fact the lowest perigee where space objects are still able to continue in their orbiting around the earth has already been imposed as a natural criterion for the delimitation of outer space. This delimitation of outer space has also been evidenced by the constant practice of a large number of States and their tacit consent to space activities accomplished so far at this distance and beyond it. Of course there are still numerous opposing views on the delineation of a outer space boundary by space powers like U.S.A., England, France and so on. Therefore, first of all to solve the legal issues faced by the international community in outer space activities like delimitation problem, there needs a positive and peaceful will of international cooperation. From this viewpoint, President John F. Kennedy once described the rationale behind the outer space activities in his famous "Moon speech" given at Rice University in 1962. He called upon Americans and all mankind to strive for peaceful cooperation and coexistence in our future outer space activities. And Kennedy explained, "There is no strife, ${\ldots}$ nor any international conflict in outer space as yet. But its hazards are hostile to us all: Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation may never come again." This speech seems to even present us in the contemporary era with ample suggestions for further peaceful cooperation in outer space activities including the delimitation of outer space.