• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제66권
• /
• pp.47-73
• /
• 2015

This study primarily concerns the fundamental breach of contract by a seller and a buyer's two remedies that are entitled to under the CISG. Regarding the breach of contract, the CISG simply provides a list of each party's obligations and regulates that both parties should fulfill the obligations under the contract as well as the Convention. When the CISG specifies the remedies for both parties, it requires to divide the fundamental breach of contract from breach of contract. By doing so, it provides different remedies to both parties depending on whether it is the fundamental breach of contract or not. From the point of buyer's view, the buyer has two remedies when there is the fundamental breach of contract by the seller; they are the right to declare the avoidance of contract and to require the delivery of substitute goods. The fundamental breach of contract is a pre-requisite condition to be fulfilled in order to exercise these two remedies. Although the CISG provides the definition of fundamental breach of contract, its meaning is not clear enough, so it is interpreted and applied case by case. Therefore, this paper will analyze recent cases focusing on the most debated issues regarding the interpretation of fundamental breach of contract; first, who determines the substantial deprivation and when is the time for determination, second, when is the time for unpredictability of substantial deprivation, and last, who has a burden of proof.

• 대한물리치료과학회지
• /
• 제28권1호
• /
• pp.33-45
• /
• 2021

Background: Children with cerebral palsy have difficulty acquiring motor skills through motor learning due to lack of motor planning of the central nervous system and musculoskeletal dysfunction. Motor learning is the acquisition or modification of movements with the aim of developing skilled movements and behaviors. Cerebral palsy improve motor function through motor learning, and effective motor learning mainly depends on practice parameters such as learning feedback. Therefore, we investigate the effect of motor learning in children with cerebral palsy and try to present the possibility of clinical application. Design: A systemic review. Methods: Research papers were published from Jan, 2010 to Dec, 2020 and were searched using PubMed and Medline. The search terms are 'task specific training' OR 'motor learning' OR 'feedback(Mesh term)' OR 'goal activity' AND 'cerebral palsy(Mesh term)'. A total of eight papers were analyzed in this study. The paper presented the quality level based on the research evidence, and also presented PEDro (Physiotherapy Evidence Database) scores to evaluate the quality of design studies in randomized clinical trials. Results: The results showed that motor learning coaching in children with cerebral palsy improved motor function in post and follow up tests. Also, self-control feedback of motor learning is more effective than external control feedback. 100% external control feedback of motor learning is effective in the acquisition phase and 50% external feedback of motor learning is effective in the retain phase. Conclusion: These results suggest that it will be an important data for establishing evidence on the effect of motor learning arbitration methods in children with cerebral palsy to develop clinical applicability and protocols.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제41권4호
• /
• pp.21-40
• /
• 2016

본 연구는 최근 구매주문서 발송을 조건으로 한 매도인의 승낙을 주요 이슈로 하는 CISG상 판례가 있어 이를 소개하고 심층 분석한 논문에 해당한다. 이러한 분석을 위해 CISG상 계약의 성립 관련 조항을 청약과 승낙으로 나누어 고찰하고, 특히 이 판례의 주요 이슈가 되고 있는 대응청약과 승낙의 요건 및 연착된 승낙의 인용 관련 조항을 주로 고찰하였다. 이와 더불어 판례의 분석과 CISG상 관련 조항의 분석을 통해 CISG를 준거법으로 하여 국제물품매매거래에 임하는 거래 당사자들이 유의하여야 할 실무적 시사점을 도출하였다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.167-187
• /
• 2007

As Korea has reached a free trade agreement with the United States of America, it is required to provide an appropriate procedure to ".kr" domain name disputes based on the principles established in the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy(UDRP). Currently, Internet address Dispute Resolution Committee(IDRC) established under Article 16 of the Act on Internet Address Resources provides the dispute resolution proceedings to resolve ".kr" domain name disputes. While the IDRC's proceeding is similar to the UDRP administrative proceeding in procedural aspects, the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy that is established by the IDRC and that applies to disputes involving ".kr" domain names is very different from the UDRP for generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) in substantial aspects. Under the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement(KORUS FTA), it is expected that either the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy to be amended to adopt the UDRP or the IDRC to examine the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy in order to harmonize it with the principles established in the UDRP. It is a common practice of cybersquatters to warehouse a number of domain names without any active use of these domain names after their registration. The Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy provides that the complainant may request to transfer or delete the registration of the disputed domain name if the registrant registered, holds or uses the disputed domain name in bad faith. This provision lifts the complainant's burden of proof to show the respondent's bad faith because the complainant is only required to prove one of the three bad faiths which are registration in bad faith, holding in bad faith, or use in bad faith. The aforementioned resolution procedure is different from the UDRP regime which requires the complainant, in compliance with paragraph 4(b) of the UDRP, to prove that the disputed domain name has been registered in bad faith and is being used in bad faith. Therefore, the complainant carries heavy burden of proof under the UDRP. The IDRC should deny the complaint if the respondent has legitimate rights or interests in the domain names. Under the UDRP, the complainant must show that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The UDRP sets out three illustrative circumstances, any one of which if proved by the respondent, shall be evidence of the respondent's rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name. As the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy provides only a general provision regarding the respondent's legitimate rights or interests, the respondent can be placed in a very week foundation to be protected under the Policy. It is therefore recommended for the IDRC to adopt the three UDRP circumstances to guide how the respondent can demonstrate his/her legitimate rights or interests in the disputed domain name. In accordance with the KORUS FTA, the Korean Government is required to provide online publication to a reliable and accurate database of contact information concerning domain name registrants. Cybersquatters often provide inaccurate contact information or willfully conceal their identity to avoid objection by trademark owners. It may cause unnecessary and unwarranted delay of the administrative proceedings. The respondent may loss the opportunity to assert his/her rights or legitimate interests in the domain name due to inability to submit the response effectively and timely. The respondent could breach a registration agreement with a registrar which requires the registrant to submit and update accurate contact information. The respondent who is reluctant to disclose his/her contact information on the Internet citing for privacy rights and protection. This is however debatable as the respondent may use the proxy registration service provided by the registrar to protect the respondent's privacy.

• 헤리티지:역사와 과학
• /
• 제54권1호
• /
• pp.184-205
• /
• 2021

사회 운영 및 공공 정책 관리의 새로운 개념과 원리로서 거버넌스가 중시되고 영향력도 점차 강화·확산되고 있다. 다양한 거버넌스 이론과 사례 분석 연구가 활성화되는 가운데 여러 거버넌스 개념을 포용하면서 참여와 타협을 넘어 상호의존성과 책임감을 높이고 최적화된 사회적 조정 양식을 혼합·활용하여 새로운 공공 가치를 창조하는 협력적 거버넌스 개념이 주목받고 있다. 문화재 분야에서도 공공 정책 집행의 효율성과 지속가능성, 공공 서비스 확장성을 위해 거버넌스 관련 연구가 이어지고 있다. 본 연구는 협력적 거버넌스의 정부 역할론(촉진·중재·여건조성)에 주목하면서 문화재 분야 협력적 거버넌스의 운영 체계를 파악하고자 '문화재지킴이' 정책을 연구 대상으로 삼았다. 문화재 분야 거버넌스 정책의 흐름 속에서 문화재지킴이 정책의 도입과 전개 과정, 운영 방식 등을 통해 문화재지킴이 정책의 위상과 역할, 특징을 조명해보았고 협력적 거버넌스 관점에서 전반적인 참여 주체와 협력 구조, 협력 방식과 상호작용, 정책적 특징의 분석과 함께 문화재지킴이 정책의 파트너십 부문은 안셀·개쉬(Ansell & Gash) 모형의 분석틀로 활용하여 세부적인 협력 체계와 작동 방식을 확인하였다. 문화재지킴이 정책의 특징과 분석 결과를 보면 문화재 분야에서 민간 주도 또는 수평적 민관 협력의 협력적 거버넌스로 본격화된 정책적 대표성을 갖는 점, 민간 모델의 정책 도입과 연대 및 전담 조직과 전문 인력이 주요한 성공 요인으로 작용한 점, 그리고 모형 분석에서는 자원·지식의 불균형과 협력 선례 등이 참여 유인 증가의 배경이 되고 다자간 협력 지향의 개방성과 포괄성, 전담 조직의 공공 리더형 리더십과 참여기관의 오너십 확장, 협력 과정의 순서 재배열 등을 확인할 수 있었다. 한편 정책 운영의 환경과 조직, 협력 방식에서 한계를 가져 협력 중심의 포괄적인 법률적 안정성 구축, 전담 조직의 전략적 개편, 중간 지원 조직의 역량 강화와 지원, 분야별로 개별적·다자간 협의체 운영 등의 활성화 방안을 제시하였다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.261-301
• /
• 2016

Recently the abusive calls on on-demand bonds have been a critical issue among many engineering and construction companies in Korea. On-demand bond is referred to as an independent guarantee in the sense that the guarantee is independent from its underlying contract although it was issued based on such underlying contract. For this reason, the issuing bank is not required to and/or entitled to look into whether there really is a breach of underlying contract in relation to the call on demand-bonds. Due to this kind of principle of independence, the applicant has to run the risk of the on demand bond being called by the beneficiary without due grounds. Only where the call proves to be fraudulent or abusive in a very clear way, the issuing bank would not be obligated to pay the bond proceeds for the call on on-demand bonds. In order to prevent the issuing bank from paying the proceeds under the on-demand bond, the applicant usually files with its competent court an application for injunction prohibiting the beneficiary from calling against the issuing bank. However, it is in practice difficult for the applicant to prove the beneficiary's call on the bond to be fraudulent since the courts in almost all the jurisdictions of advanced countries require very strict and objective evidences such as the documents which were signed by the owner (beneficiary) or any other third party like the engineer. There is another way of preventing the beneficiary from calling on the bond, which is often utilized especially in the United Kingdom or Western European countries such as Germany. Based upon the underlying contract, the contractor which is at the same time the applicant of on-demand bond requests the court to order the owner (the beneficiary) not to call on the bond. In this case, there apparently seems to be no reason why the court should apply the strict fraud rule to determine whether to grant an injunction in that the underlying legal relationship was created based on a construction contract rather than a bond. However, in most jurisdictions except for United Kingdom and Singapore, the court also applies the strict fraud rule on the ground that the parties promised to make the on-demand bond issued under the construction contract. This kind of injunction is highly unlikely to be utilized on the international level because it is very difficult in normal situations to establish the international jurisdiction towards the beneficiary which will be usually located outside the jurisdiction of the relevant court. This kind of injunction ordering the owner not to call on the bond can be rendered by the arbitrator as well even though the arbitrator has no coercive power for the owner to follow it. Normally there would be no arbitral tribunal existing at the time of the bond being called. In this case, the emergency arbitrator which most of the international arbitration rules such as ICC, LCIA and SIAC, etc. adopt can be utilized. Finally, the contractor can block the issuing bank from paying the bond proceeds by way of a provisional attachment in case where it also has rights to claim some unpaid interim payments or damages. This is the preservative measure under civil law system, which the lawyers from common law system are not familiar with. As explained in this article, it is very difficult to block the issuing bank from paying in response to the bond call by the beneficiary even if the call has no valid ground under the underlying construction contract. Therefore, it is necessary for the applicants who are normally engineering and construction companies to be prudent to make on-demand bonds issued. They need to take into account the creditability of the project owner as well as trustworthiness of the judiciary system of the country where the owner is domiciled.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제15권1호
• /
• pp.35-65
• /
• 2013

2012년 12월 국토해양부와 지식경제부는 화주기업과 물류기업 간 표준계약서를 보급 추진하기 위하여 위원회를 개최하고 표준계약서를 배포하였으며, 이러한 배경 하에 본 연구는 물류아웃소싱의 계약 관계에서 양 업계가 상생거래를 하기위한 물류계약서의 가이드라인을 제시하기 위하여 계약의 유형과 속성에 관한 선행연구를 검토하였고, 국내와 해외의 물류 계약서의 실제 사례 제시를 통하여, 국내의 물류 계약서의 구체화 정도와 해외 계약서들의 구체화 정도를 비교하였으며, 향후 국내 기업이 물류계약서 체결 시 현재보다 더 구체적으로 위험발생 조항이나 비용발생 조항 등을 반영해야 하는 현실적인 시사점을 제공하였다. 분석결과 첫째, 계약서의 구성과 내용은 국내와 해외가 공통적으로 계약의 정의와 기간, 업무의 범위, 업무 처리의 절차, 정산의 방법, 분쟁의 해결 방법과 같이 일반적으로 구성원 간 거래에 필요한 공식적인 원칙을 다루고 있는 것을 알 수 있었으며, 둘째, 국내와 해외의 계약서 모두 상황 발생에 따라 탄력적으로 해결이 가능하도록 규정하고 분쟁이 발생 할 경우 분쟁 기구를 통해 해결을 하는 신고전적 계약법을 따르고 있음을 알 수 있었다. 그리고 셋째, 국내 계약서에 비교하여 해외의 물류 계약서가 발생 가능한 위험에 대비하여 보다 구체적인 조항들을 담고 있는 것을 알수 있었으며, 해외 계약서에 비해 국내의 계약서가 화주기업에 보다 유리한 조항들을 많이 담고 있는 것을 알 수 있었다. 이러한 연구를 통하여 물류기업과 화주기업은 계약사항 협의 단계에서 계약 이후에 발생 가능성이 있는 위험이나 문제점들을 사전 예상하고 상호 협의를 통하여 계약서에 반영하는 것을 적극적으로 노력하여 물류기업과 화주기업과의 구조적인 문제로 발생된 손해를 물류기업에서 감수하는 관행을 없애도록 노력하여야 하는 아이디어를 제공하였고, 향후 표준 물류계약서 배포를 위해 구체적으로 반영이 될 수 있는 정책적인 가이드라인을 제공하였다.