• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제19권1호
• /
• pp.99-119
• /
• 2009

In modern capitalistic society, the harmed consumers like consumer complaints etc. are increasing day by day being caused by mass production and mass consumption etc. These consumer damages can come out as many types, but can be the most typical form. If there is a majority of the small sum damage, being saved by legal procedures is a fact that many consumers renounce it for long time, lots of expense and the complexity of the process etc. So, the government enforces consumer groups suit and collective dispute mediation system revising Framework Act on consumer. Specially, collective dispute mediation system, one of the ADR, saves the harmed consumers and accomodates efficiency in management of consumer dispute settlement commission by dealing with it collectively if the same or similar damage without a legal procedure happens to a great number of consumers. However, collective consumer dispute mediation system also has a number of problems. Therefore, this thesis is looking into the function and procedure of the collective consumer dispute mediation system on Framework Act on consumer as well as its problems and ways of improving it.

• 보건의료산업학회지
• /
• 제4권2호
• /
• pp.107-117
• /
• 2010

In this paper, the researcher looked into major issues in the "Act (Draft) on Remedy for Damage from Medical Accident and Medical Dispute Mediation, etc." which was proposed by the Health & Welfare Committee, the National Assembly of the Republic of Korea, and which was pending with the Legislation & Judiciary Committee. Then the researcher pointed out worrisome problems therein and presented suggestion" to improve problematic situations. First of all, the researcher examined the following items which are major points in the aforementioned Act: 1) Establishment of Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Center, 2) Procedures for mediation and arbitration of medical disputes, 3) Establishment of Medical Injury Compensation Association, 4) Introduction of proxy payment for damages, 5) Compensation for no-fault medical accidents, 6) A system concerned with special cases on criminal punishment. Next, the researcher closely reviewed the following possible issues: 1) Limit of arbitrary mediation, 2) Postponement of the system concerned with special case on criminal punishment, 3) Examination of reasons for rejection, 4) Function and role of the Appraisal department, 5) A possibility of being reduced to an evidence collection procedure for lawsuit, 6) A possibility of no-fault compensation rather than injury compensation, 7) Operational issues related proxy payment for damages. Lastly, the researcher presented suggestions on how to improve each problematic issue.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.161-182
• /
• 1999

The purpose of this paper is to examine the applicability of the UNIDROIT Principle in international commercial arbitration. For this purpose, I have studies the basic two characters of this Principles: One is of general rule(principle); Another is of international and commercial character. According to CISG, questions concerning matters governed by the CISG which are not expressly settled in it are to be settled in conformity with the general principles, so this Principles will cover many questions which are not expressly settled in the applicable law, by gap-filing, analogy or usage. In the preamble of this Principles, there are five cases in which the Principles shall be applied or may be applied. If the disputes are submitted to the any national court, the application of this Principles would be restricted because of the mandatory rules of national, international or supranational origin. But the disputes are submitted to arbitration, the arbitrator would have more discretional powers to apply the Principles than the judge. The reason is that in the arbitration, the arbitrators do not bear obligation to act in conformity with the law applicable by virtue of the rules of rules of private international law. I also examined the applicability of the Principles in cases which there are no mentions in preamble: When the international arbitrators choose the Principles; When the arbitrators decide ex aequo et bono; When the both parties have not chosen the governing law; When there are gaps in domestic law chosen by the parties; When the applicable domestic law is insufficient. In all these cases, the Principles may be applied more easily and conveniently in arbitration than in litigation. Thus to envisage the application of this Principle in international arbitration, first both parties in international commercial contracts should incorporate this Principle as a governing law in their contracts, and second, the arbitrators should try to apply this Principles in their arbitrations by choice, analogy, general principles or usage.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제31권1호
• /
• pp.83-105
• /
• 2021

If aggrieving consumers or employees cannot prove both substantive and procedural unconscionability, many U.S. state courts will enforce arbitration agreements. Additionally, U.S. courts weigh a variety of factors to determine whether an arbitration agreement is substantively unconscionable. For example, U.S. courts have considered one or a combination of the following factors: (1) the fairness of contractual terms; (2) the severity of contractual terms' deviation from prevailing standards, customs, or practices within a particular industry; (3) the reasonableness of goods-and-services contract prices; (4) the commercial reasonableness of the contract terms; (5) the purpose and effect of the terms and (6) "the allocation of risks between the parties." Further, procedural unconscionability characterized by surprise or lack of knowledge focuses on terms that are deceptively hidden in a mass of contract language, the object of another concealment, or imposed in the circumstances involving haste or high-pressure tactics so that they are not likely to be read or understood. This unconscionability doctrine can be applied to a situation where an alcoholic dementia-afflicted older adult is admitted to a nursing home. At that time, because she had alcoholic dementia, which precluded her reading, comprehending, writing, negotiating, or signing of any legal document, her son, who did not understand the adhesion contract, signed the standardized residential contract and the arbitration agreement.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제32권2호
• /
• pp.85-114
• /
• 2022

When human rights disputes are related to the cross-border investments treaties, the investment arbitral tribunals are confronted with the question of how to adjudicate connected human rights violations. The traditional structure restricts arbitration proceedings to the parties named within an investment treaty, i.e., Investor-Claimant and State-Respondent. If human rights issues occur, States must act as proxies for citizens with human rights claims. This effectively excludes individuals or groups with human rights concerns and contradicts the premise of international human rights law that seeks to empower human rights-holders to pursue claims directly and on an international stage. The methods for intorducing human rights issues in the context of investment arbitration proceedings are suggested as follows: First, human rights arguments can be introduced into ISDS by the usual initiator of investment disputes: the investor as the complainant. Especially, if the jurisdictional and applicable law clauses of the respective international investment agreements are sufficiently broad to include human rights violations, adjudicating a pure human rights claim could be possible. Second, the host state may rely on human rights argumentation as a respondent of an investor claim. Human rights have played a role as a justification for state measures undertaken to comply with human rights laws. Third, third party interventions by NGOs and civil society groups as amici curiae may act as advocates for affected populations or communities in response to the reluctance of governments to introduce their own human rights duties into the investment dispute. Finally, arbitrators have also referred to human rights ex officio, i.e., without having a dispute party referring to the specific argument. This was mainly the case in the context of determining the scope of property rights and the existence of an expropriation. As all U.N. member states have human rights obligations, international investment laws must be presumed to be in conformity with the relevant human rights obligations.

• 한국언론정보학보
• /
• 제76권
• /
• pp.151-182
• /
• 2016

디지털 시대에 개인의 프라이버시 및 인격권 보호를 위해 잊힐 권리(the right to be forgotten)를 보장해야 한다는 주장이 꾸준히 제기되어 왔다. 본 논문은 유럽에서 촉발된 잊힐 권리에 대한 논의가 개인정보보호를 중심으로 링크 삭제 청구권이라는 법적 권리로 구체화된 반면, 한국에서 진행되고 있는 잊힐 권리 관련 논의가 언론 기사로 인한 개인의 인격권 침해 전반에 대한 피해 구제 차원으로 확대되면서 기사 삭제 청구권을 포함하는 법적 권리로 변용돼 논의되는 상황에 주목했다. 이에 본 논문은 잊힐 권리의 개념 및 그 보호법익을 해외 사례를 통해 파악한 후, 국내의 표현의 자유 규제 법률들을 살펴봄으로써 현재 추진되고 있는 기사 삭제 청구권 신설의 타당성을 검토했다. 한국은 헌법 21조 4항, 정보통신망법, 형법상의 명예훼손죄와 모욕죄, 민사상 명예훼손 손해배상 규정, 언론중재법, 공직선거법, 방송통신심의위원회의 심의, 대법원 판례 등으로 인격권과 명예훼손을 구제하는 법망이 해외에 비해 꽉 짜여 있다. 따라서 본 논문은 여기에 추가해 언론중재법에 기사 삭제 청구권을 신설하는 것은, 링크 삭제 청구권을 인정하지만 언론 기사 자체를 삭제하지는 않는 세계적 추세와 결을 달리할 뿐 아니라, 상충하는 법익들을 비교형량할 때 표현의 자유를 심대하게 침해할 위험이 크다고 주장한다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.343-405
• /
• 2009

This paper is to discuss essential business of hospital business. While the labor world and ILO made continuous recommendation for improvements towards the compulsory arbitration system along with the controversy over unconstitutionality of the system, the Constitutional Court ruled that the system is constitutional on December 23, 1996(90hunba19) and on May 15, 2003 (2001hunga31). Despite this decision from the Constitutional Court, there has been much controversy over whether the compulsory arbitration system infringes the rights of collective action against the principle of trade union & labor relations adjustment which allows Commissioner of the Labor Relations Commission to decide on submission of arbitration by virtue of his/her authority in case where industrial disputes take place in the essential public-service businesses. The revision on the above provision was closely examined from the year 2003 and an agreement was made on the abolition of the compulsory arbitration system and the introduction of essential business with a grand compromise among labor unions, employers and the government on September 11, 2006 followed by revision(Essential business system enacted on January 1, 2008) of the Trade Union & Labor Relations Adjustment Act on December 30 in the same year. Accordingly, in order to perform the essential business, parties to labor relations must have an agreement or obtain a decision by the Labor Relations Commission before taking industrial actions. This paper firstly examined the concept of essential public-service businesses and essential business, legal meaning of essential business, procedures for making agreement and decision and legal effects. Secondly it intensively explored a theory against the principle of the legality which was raised from some part of society. In other words, it is claimed that a theory against the principle of the legality is not consistent with the rule of legislation and some abstract wording is against void for vagueness doctrine because part of crime constitution requirements is delegated to the Presidential Decree or to consultation among parties to labor relations. But analysis on the rule of legislation and void for vagueness doctrine reflected in the decision by the Constitutional Court led that argument for a theory against the principle of the legality is not reasonable. Close examination was done on a formal act of essential business agreement and necessity of prior agreement before submission of decision to the Labor Relations Commission which might have difficulties in performing work. In addition, an example agreement on hospital essential business is attached to help you understand this paper better.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• pp.145-179
• /
• 2001

The Federal Maritime Commission is issuing new regulations implementing the Administrative dispute Resolution Act. The new regulations expand the Commission's Alternative dispute resolution(“ADR”) services, addressing guidelines and procedures for arbitration and providing for mediation and other ADR services. This rule replaces current subpart U-(Conciliation Service), with a new subpart U-(Alternative Dispute Resolution), that contains a new Commission ADR policy and provisions for various means of ADR. The rule also revises certain other regulations to conform to the Commission's new ADR policy. So, this paper object was to study on the FMC's ADR in U.S. with the emphasis on the final rule analysis.

• 국제학술발표논문집
• /
• The 4th International Conference on Construction Engineering and Project Management Organized by the University of New South Wales
• /
• pp.357-363
• /
• 2011

Mediation has long been praised as one of effective dispute resolution methods in the area of construction law. Article 85-1 of the Taiwan Government Procurement Act was amended and promulgated by presidential decree on July 4, 2007. The second paragraph of the Article elaborates explicitly, "In the event that the application for mediation referred to in the preceding paragraph is made by the supplier, the agency may not object to such application." Beyond that, if an unsuccessful mediation of a construction dispute is due to the agency's disagreeing with the proposal or resolution for mediation proposed by the Complaint Review Board for Government Procurement ("CRBGP"), the agency may not object to the arbitration filed by the supplier. It undoubtedly reinforces the importance of the mediation-arbitration procedure. Accordingly, this paper elaborates on the mediation mechanism in Taiwan in the framework of construction disputes first. After that, dispute resolution of a local public work case is provided to demonstrate the practice of construction mediation in Taiwan. Lastly, this study proposes suggestions on applying mediation to ease similar subsequent cases.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.459-488
• /
• 2004

General interest in the out-of-court dispute resolution system are mounting in Korea, and the spread of ADR(alternative dispute resolution) is the worldwide trend. In addition, it was confirmed that the resolution of disputes by ADR such as the decision based on arbitration made by the Prime Ministerial Administrative Decision Committee is no longer in exclusive possession of the civil case. The activation of ADR could lead to the smooth agreement between parties by getting away from the once-for-all mode of decision such as the dismissal of the application or the cancellation of disposal and the like in relation to administrative cases for the years. In consequence, it is anticipated that the administrative litigation that applicants have filed by not responding to the administrative decision would greatly reduce in the future. But, it would be urgent to provide for the legal ground of the ADR system through the revision of related laws to take root in our society because ADR has no legal binding power relating to the administrative case due to the absence of its legal grounds. The fundamental reason for having hesitated to introduce ADR in relation to the administrative case for the years is the protective interest of the third party as well as the public interest that would follow in case the agreement on the dispute resolution between parties brings the dispute to a termination in the domain of the public law. The disputes related to the contract based on the public law and the like that take on a judicial character as the administrative act have been settled within the province of ADR by applying the current laws such as the Civil Arbitration Law, Mediation Law, but their application to the administrative act of the administrative agency that takes on a character of the public law has been hesitated. But as discussed earlier, there are laws and regulations that has the obscure distinction between public and private laws. But there is no significant advantage in relation to the distinction between public and private laws. To supplement and cure these defects it is necessary to include the institutional arrangement for protection of the rights and benefits of the third party, for example the provision of the imposition of the binding power on the result of ADR between parties, in enacting its related law. It can be said that the right reorganization of the out-of-court dispute resolution system in relation to the administrative case corresponds with the ideology of public administration for cooperaton in the Administrative Law. It is high time to discuss within what realm the out-of-court dispute resolution system, alternative dispute resolution system, can be accepted and what binding power is imposed on its result, not whether it is entirely introduced into the administrative case. It is thought that the current Civil Mediation Law or Arbitration Law provides the possibility of applying arbitration or mediation only to the civil case, thereby opening the possibility of arbitration in the field of the intellectual property right law. For instance, the act of the state is not required in establishing the rights related to the secret of business or copyrights. Nevertheless, the disputes arising from or in connection with the intellectual property rights law is seen as the administrative case, and they are excluded from the object of arbitration or mediation, which is thought to be improper. This is not an argument for unconditionally importing ADR into the resolution of administrative cases. Most of the Korean people are aware that the administrative litigation system is of paramount importance as the legal relief for administrative cases. Seeing that there is an independent administrative decision system based on the Administrative Decision Law other than administrative litigation in relation to administrative cases, the first and foremost task is the necessity for the shift in thinking of people, followed by consideration of the plan for relief of the rights through the improvement of the administrative decision system. Then, it is necessary to formulate the plan for the formal introduction and activation of ADR. In this process, energetic efforts should be devoted to introducing diverse forms of ADR procedures such as settlement conference, case evaluation, mini-trial, summary jury trial, early neutral evaluation adopted in the US as the method of dispute resolution other than compromise, conciliation, arbitration and mediation