• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.185-220
• /
• 2003

Korean Government is increasingly focusing on the Northeast Asia Business and Logistics Hub strategy to create a competitive advantage. A key element of this strategy is creating or leveraging distribution and logistics hubs that act as centres for distribution in Northeast Asia. A Northeast Asian e-Hub Policy is required for business hub and logistics hub in the Northeastern Asia. An e-Hub is an integrated, sophisticated set of e-Biz, information and e-trade facilities and services that provides access to a marketplace and exchangee the e-trade data. To study the e-Hub policy, Pan Asian e-Commerce Alliance, Korea-Japan e-Trade Hub project, and ASEM e-Trade project are considered. E-trade via cyberspace may need new methods of dispute resolution to reduce transaction costs for small value-related disputes and to erect structures that work well across national boundaries. Voluntary Mediation Councils and cyber tribunals should be encouraged by governmental sectors to continue developing private sector mechanisms to resolve e-trade disputes. Government-sponsored online cross-border dispute resolution systems may be also be useful to complement these private sector approaches. E-trade in Northeast Asia results in disputes owing to the incompleteness of e-trade law in the countries. These disputes contain disputes regarding e-trade model, central title registry, authentication body. To resolve these disputes in the Northeast Asia, a variety of electronic alternative dispute resolution bodies must be organized under cooperation of Korea, Japan, China. This study deals with the e-ADR construction in the Northeast Asia to resolve the disputes in the e-trade and to activate the e-trade in the Northeast Asia.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.143-164
• /
• 2022

It is not an exaggeration to say that our society is already one of disputes. Since circa 2010, the average number of lawsuits filed every year is upwards of six million cases, and resolving disputes through trials is already fully saturated. The functional roles of the court reflect that there are many lacking areas such as systems, tools, and procedures related to social integration. In addition, ADR, which is carried out in advanced capitalist nations to supplement the judicial functions, has also been implemented in our society for the past 60 years. However, for the reason why the usage rate of ADR did not increase for legal consumers, we cannot overlook government activities that did not make sufficient promotions related to the lack of awareness. In Korea, ADR is mainly composed of government-initiated types, and in particular, there is no ADR framework act that can play an integrated role. Furthermore, for the conciliation system of the court, over 80%of conciliation are conducted focusing on court of lawsuits, and legal basis and procedures between institutes are different for administrative ADR, and communication does not go smoothly, thus making it inefficient. Such examples cannot avoid being a background for criticism when considering the fundamental ideologies and beliefs of ADR. The Vinaya Pitaka of sangha related to ADR is a separate method for operating communities. This is the BDR (Buddhist Dispute Resolution) method that encompasses personal ethics, organizational ethics, harmony through various community gatherings, and adhikaranasamatha on the four issues that could occur in legal review procedures. This has become the sufficient background for succession and development for parisa sangha and gana sangha among individuals.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.3-30
• /
• 2007

The New York Convention(formally called "United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards") done in New York on June 10, 1958 has been adhered to by more than 140 States at the time of this writing, including almost all important trading nations from the Capitalist and Socialist World as well as many developing countries. The Convention can be considered as the most important Convention in the field of arbitration and as the cornerstone of current international commercial arbitration. Korea has acceded to the New York Convention since 1973. When acceding to the Convention, Korea declared that it will apply the Convention to the recognition and enforcement of awards made only in the territory of another Contracting State on the basis of reciprocity. Also, Korea declared that it will apply the Convention only to differences arising out of legal relationships, whether contractual or not, which are considered as commercial under the national law of Korea. The provisions relating to the enforcement of arbitral awards falling under the New York Convention begin at Article III. The Article III contains the general obligation for the Contracting States to recognize Convention awards as binding and to enforce them in accordance with their rules of procedure. The Convention requires a minimum of conditions to be fulfilled by the party seeking enforcement. According to Article IV(1), that party has only to supply (1) the duly authenticated original award or a duly certified copy thereof, and (2) the original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy thereof. In fulfilling these conditions, the party seeking enforcement produces prima facie evidence entitling it to obtain enforcement of the award. It is then up to the other party to prove that enforcement should not be granted on the basis of the grounds for refusal of enforcement enumerated in the subsequent Article V(1). Grounds for refusal of enforcement are stipulated in Article V is divided into two parts. Firstly, listed in the first Para. of Article V are the grounds for refusal of enforcement which are to be asserted and proven by the respondent. Secondly, listed in Para. 2 of Article V, are the grounds on which a court may refuse enforcement on its own motion. These grounds are non-arbitrability of the subject matter and violation of the public policy of the enforcement country. The three main features of the grounds for refusal of enforcement of an award under Article V, which are almost unanimously affirmed by the courts, are the following. Firstly, The grounds for refusal of enforcement mentioned in Article V are exhaustive. No other grounds can be invoked. Secondly, and this feature follows from the first one, the court before which enforcement of the award is sought may not review the merits of the award because a mistake in fact or law by the arbitrators is not included in the list of grounds for refusal of enforcement set forth in Article V. Thirdly, the party against whom enforcement is sought has the burden of proving the existence of one or more of the grounds for refusal of enforcement. The grounds for refusal of enforcement by a court on its own motion, listed in the second Para. of Article V, are non-arbitrability of the subject matter and public policy of the enforcement country. From the court decisions reported so far at home and abroad, it appears that courts accept a violation of public policy in extreme cases only, and frequently justify their decision by distinguishing between domestic and international public policy. The Dec. 31, 1999 amendment to the Arbitration Act of Korea admits the basis for enforcement of foreign arbitral awards rendered under the New York Convention. In Korea, a holder of a foreign arbitral award is obliged to request from the court a judgment ordering enforcement of the award.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.19 no.4
• /
• pp.139-147
• /
• 2014

Medical disputes the problem that occurs essentially among the rapidly increasing of the demand for health care and the attention of the public health. The subject of dispute is mostly criminal penalties and civil redress due to a physician's medical malpractice, resolved by agreement was prioritized. They trying to solve through the litigation and exercise the skills. But, the lack of clear standards and related legislation make difficult to solve the problem. for this, "The Act of Medical Malpractice Damage's Relief and Mediation for Medical Dispute Resolution" (Medical Disputes Adjustment Act) was enacted in April 7, 2011 and performed in Apr. 8, 2012. To solve the problem autonomously between the parties. It is the legislative intent such as mediation or arbitration to solve the conflict between the parties. But there are some problems that examined from the perspective of constitutional review with the criminal and civil problems. Therefore, this paper will find out the legal issues about Medical Dispute Adjustment Act and the constitutional and civil issues. And want to expect to be prepared the more stable and efficient solution of medical disputes.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.43 no.5
• /
• pp.139-158
• /
• 2018

As trade volume increases and the business environment becomes more complex and competitive, international trade disputes are also increasing and becoming more complex. Parties need to become more aware of alternatives to costly and time consuming arbitration and litigation. The ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) can encompass all dispute resolution processed and can act as a substitute for traditional litigation. Mediation, a type of ADR, offers an amicable dispute settlement mechanism between concerned parties through a natural mediator. There are several strong points of mediation compared with litigation or arbitration. First of all, mediation can take place without having to complete time-consuming and expensive discovery processes associated with litigation. In addition, since mediation is considered a private process, the dispute can remain out of the public eye. It can be embarrassing and disrupt business when customer or suppliers learn that a company is involved in litigation. Lastly, mediation is less adversarial than litigation or arbitration, so the parties often can salvage their relationships. Often the parties to mediation find themselves continuing to conduct business. In spite of such benefits of mediation, it is less used in Korea and therefore, this article aims to promote the mediation system in international trade disputes. However, this paper has limitation, for example, why ADR is not used well in Korea and need to suggest how ADR can work best in international trade disputes.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.91-122
• /
• 2014

For a variety of reasons, the number of medical disputes is continuously rising. Due to the intrinsic qualities of medical treatments, one would find it more apt to subject medical disputes to general conflict resolution procedures rather than to once-for-all decisions under legal suits. To address the increasing medical disputes with greater professionalism and efficiency, the Medical Disputes Mediation Act was enacted and a medical dispute mediation system put in place, while drawbacks have been blamed to both. The current mediation procedures require the respondent's agreement as a disclosure requirement. A reasonable improvement to this would be to amend the regulation of agreement supposition, or to enforce procedural participation only to public health facilities managed by the national or regional government. Furthermore, small claims cases of 20 million KRW or less in claim may be considered for conciliation-prepositive principle. The concentration on small claim medical disputes is a phenomenon that can be addressed by carrying out maximum authentication commissions or similar measures, one of the solutions by enhancing the public trust in the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency. The proper management of medical authentication teams is one way to address the existing problems in the authentication system. For this, the number of team members shall be increased under more flexible authentication procedures. All indemnity resources for medical accidents of force majeure must be borne by the Government, for it is the body principally responsible for social compensation. Placing this cost on the establisher of the subject medical facility holds the possibility of violating fundamental rights. While the costs for subrogation payment system for damages may be borne by the healthcare facility establisher, a deposit-based system must be created for cases in which the facility shuts down, without holding the responsibility for accident cause. Such change to a deposit-based system will evade the controversies of unconstitutionality, etc.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.153-185
• /
• 2020

In principle, even if serious consequences such as death or serious injury of a patient occur as a result of a medical accident, if the medical malpractice of a health care worker is not recognized, the health care worker is not held liable for said consequences. However, with the opening of the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency on April 7, 2012, a system was established to compensate health care personnel for their medical malpractices only in the case of "injuries caused by medical accidents in the course of childbirth" (hereinafter referred to as "program for compensation of medical accidents"). Article 46 paragraph 1 of the current Medical Dispute Mediation Act, which is the basis of the Force Majeure Medical Accident Compensation System, stipulates that "medical accidents under delivery" claims are to be determined by the Medical Accident Compensation Review Committee are subject to the compensation project. And the details of the compensation, ratio of sharing financial resources for compensation, scope of compensation, and the guidelines and procedure for the payment of compensations are prescribed by Presidential Decree. In other words, the Presidential Decree requires the state to pay 70 percent of the compensation funds, and 30 percent of the above funds among health care providers. The Constitutional Court has decided on the 2015Hun-Ga13 that the scope of the health care institution's founders and the share of the compensation funds cannot be directly determined by the law, and that the portion delegated by the Presidential decree does not violate the Principle of Legal Protection nor Comprehensive Nondelegation Doctrine. However, this can be seen as an exclusion of accountability for force-induced delivery accidents even if there is no negligence of the medical staff. If the nature of the system is a type of social security system with a social compensatory nature, it could consider eliminating the health care innovator's cost-sharing provisions, leaving the full cost to the state. However, it is also necessary to review institutional protocols that strengthen the efforts of medical institutions in areas such as analysis of the causes of medical accidents and measures to prevent their recurrence. In addition, I think that the conclusion of the Act is in line with the purpose of the Comprehensive Wage Support Regulations that at minimum the law sets an upper limit of the compensation funds that are to be paid by health and medical institutions. Moreover, it is reasonable for the Medical Accident Compensation Review Committee to specify gestational age and weight of births, which are the criteria for compensation, under the Enforcement Decree of the Medical Dispute Mediation Act, in relation to the criteria for payment of contributions by the Medical Accident Compensation Review Committee, and to set the detailed criteria.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.139-171
• /
• 2018

The 「Act on Remedies for Injuries from Medical Malpractice and Mediation of Medical Disputes」(hereinafter referred to as 'the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes') provides that the state should compensate the victims of medical accidents occurred irresistibly in childbirth despite that health and medical service personnel fulfilled their duty of care for their damage within the range of its budget(Article 46 of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes). Given that victims of medical accidents could expect demage recovery only through lawsuits thus far, this act can be said to be a groundbreaking act. However, However, as 30% of the costs for such medical accident compensation projects are borne by those who have records of childbirth among the founders of health and medical institutions (Article 21 of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes), there has been a question about whether doctors are held responsible despite that the accidents such as the deaths of mothers and newborn babies occurred irresistibly without doctors' fault. However, recently, the Constitutional Court ruled that 'the range of founders of health and medical institutions' and 'share ratios of finances for compensation' in Article 46 (3) of the Act on Mediation of Medical Disputes' related to the imposition of the share of costs are institutional (Constitutional Court ruling dated April 26, 2018, 2015Heonga13, hereinafter referred to as 'the ruling in the case'). Although the ruling in the case was made based on only the principle of statutory reservation and the principle of ban on comprehensive authorization, this paper added a practical judgment. This paper proved that the share of costs in this case has the nature of burden charges in pursuit of study and does not infringe on the property rights of the founders of health medical institutions even in light of the principle of proportionality because there is a legitimate reason for imposing the burden charge. The imposition of the share of costs in the system for compensation for medical accidents occurred irresistibly is against the principle of liability with fault in part. However, the medical accident compensation projects are rational a national policy for the victims of medical accidents and the medical world clearly gains some benefits from the effect to terminate medical disputes. The expansion of finances for compensation through the payments of the share of costs will reduce the suffering and misunderstanding of victims of medical accidents occurred in the process of childbirth and will be very helpful to the construction of stable treatment environments of medical workers by quickly establishing the medical accident compensation projects as such.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.48
• /
• pp.46-62
• /
• 2009

The current study attempted to review the standards of retransmisison consent and arbitration for the terrestrial broadcasting signal. The standards are based upon the principles encouraged by the MIAC(Ministry of Internal Affairs and Communications). It has been criticized that the standards of judgement for the retransimission consent and arbitration are ambiguous and arbitrary in Japan. In 2009, MIAC announced five decisions regarding the retransmission of over-the-air. The result of the current study found that the regulations of compulsory over-the-air signal retransmission have been sustained until now. The retransmission policy of the Japan government based upon three principles; localism, proper cause and copyright act. The judgment is dependent on the intrepretation of MIAC's standard about these three principles.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.125-151
• /
• 2018

Rapid industrial growth based on massive fossil fuel energy consumption has caused serious damages on natural environment and every aspects of human life. As demands for clean and pleasant living circumstance increases, conflicts and disputes around environmental problems have also been widespread. Given the 'environmental rights' is a relatively new legal concept, however, resolving environmental disputes through the traditional legal principles and litigation procedures could be restrictive and, in some sense. inefficient as well as expensive. With efforts to develop new legal principles on environmental disputes, the environmental dispute adjustment system has been introduced as an alternative dispute resolution to the traditional legal dispute procedures. The Korean Environmental Dispute Resolution Commission introduced as the environmental dispute adjustment system has been well established for the past twenty-seven years, given the steadily increasing numbers of applications to the Commission over environmental disputes. However, as most cases are still small in money terms and mainly subject to adjudication, the effectiveness and practical contribution of the Commission in the resolution of environmental disputes have in fact been limited. For the enhancement of the status and roles of the Commission as the prior instrument of the alternative dispute resolution(ADR) in environmental disputes, several suggestions could be considered as follows: First, mediation needs to be more activated than adjudication in order to meet the primary purpose of ADR that resolves environmental disputes according to free will of concerned parties. Second, the scope of mediation could be expanded to the areas including potential environmental damages. Third, the roles and responsibilities of the Environmental Dispute Resolution Commissions at both central and local levels need to be evenly distributed. Fourth, the mechanism and procedures of environmental dispute resolution should be standardized. Fifth, the status of the Environmental Dispute Resolution Commission could be elevated in rank by shifting its current affiliation from the Ministry of Environment to the Office of Prime Minister. Sixth, the organizational structure and human resources of the Commission need to be reinforced. Seventh, the current situation that tends to give priority to litigation procedures when an environment dispute is simultaneously pending in litigation and mediation should be eased and properly adjusted. Eighth, the adoption of mandatory mediation in advance to litigation needs to be discussed. Ninth, the legal authority of the Commission's decisions should be further guaranteed. If above suggestions are thoroughly reviewed and properly adopted, the roles, authority and power of the Environmental Dispute Resolution Commission would be increased in the era when environmental conflicts get widespread, requiring an effective alternative environmental dispute resolution mechanism.