• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.53-83
• /
• 2023

The investment agreement prepared at the beginning of inter-Korean economic cooperation in 2000 can be evaluated as very ineffective as a product of mutual political and diplomatic compromise rather than an effective protection for our investment assets. South Korean companies suffered a lot of losses due to the freezing of assets in the Geumgang mountain district and the closure of the Kaeseung Industrial Complex, but they did not receive practical damage relief due to institutional vulnerabilities. Currently, North Korea is under international economic sanctions of the UN Security Council, so it is true that the resumption of inter-Korean economic cooperation is far away, but North Korea's human resources and geographical location are still attractive investment destinations for us. Therefore, if strained relations between the two Koreas recover in the future and international economic sanctions on North Korea are eased, Korean companies' investment in North Korea will resume. However, the previous inter-Korean investment agreement system was a fictional systemthat was ineffective. Therefore, if these safety devices are not reorganized when economic cooperation resumes, unfair damage to Korean companies will be repeated again. The core of the improved investment guarantee system is not a bilateral system between the two Koreas, but the establishment of a multilateral system through North Korea's inclusion in the international economy. Specifically, it includes encouraging North Korea to join international agreements for the execution of arbitration decisions, securing subrogation rights through membership of international insurance groups such as MIGA, creating matching funds by international financial organizations. Through this new approach, it will be possible to improve the safety of Korean companies' investment in North Korea, and ultimately, it will be necessary to lay the foundation for mutual development through economic cooperation between the two Koreas.

• Journal of Contemporary Eastern Asia
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.1-23
• /
• 2011

China's proposal of the CAFTA (China-ASEAN Free Trade Area) in 2001 prompted a great debate about whether China was a trade competitor of ASEAN, given their similarity in economic development levels and trade/export structures. That Beijing shifted its focus on economic cooperation from the international level to the regional level led to its proposal of the CAFTA. As the Framework Agreement (Framework Agreement on Comprehensive Economic Cooperation between China and ASEAN) showed, Beijing's careful consideration for four newer ASEAN members (Cambodia, Laos, Myanmar and Vietnam) intended not only to help all ASEAN members develop economically, but also to narrow the economic gap existing between them and the six old ASEAN members; in return, China was recognized as a full market economy, which it is not currently recognized within the framework of the WTO. The substantial rise in bilateral trade and the structural changes of the trade in goods between China and ASEAN member nations after 2001 proves that ASEAN benefited more from the CAFTA, particularly when the areas where ASEAN had the comparative advantages were designated as the priority cooperation areas between China and ASEAN. In sum, similarities existing in economic development levels and industrial structures between China and ASEAN made them natural economic competitors. However, closer studies of trade in goods of S1-7, S1-6 and S1-0 reveal that China acted as an increasingly complementary trade partner of ASEAN after 2001.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.21-34
• /
• 1990

The U.S.-Korea fisheries relationship was concluded on the legal basis of Korea as a distant-water fishing nation and U.S. as a coastal state, and aiming effective conservation, management and rational utilization of the marine living resources. The existing two legal problems on U.S.-Korea fisheries relationship are the pelagic driftnet fishing on the high seas and trawl fishing in the Bering Sea. The results and countermeasure discussed on the positive legal systems of both countries which simultaneously rationalize the conflicting standpoints each other are as follows : 1. For the sake of rational conservation and utilization of the high seas fishery resources, an international organization composing of all the coastal states and fishing nations concerned must be established, and it shall be shall be more desirable to manage the resources by the international joint control system than by the bilateral agreements between the countries concerned. 2. The U.S.-Korea Fisheries Agreement being based on the MFCMA was concluded by mutual understanding between both countries. Accordingly, no protest exists against legal status of the Agreement because it has acted as a customary norm in keeping fisheries relationship between both countries within the U.S. EEZ. 3. The existing fisheries legislative system of Korea is insufficient to support development of the industry satisfactorily. Therefore a special legislation, for example $\ulcorner$Distant-water Fishery Promotion Act$\lrcorner$, is required. And a perfect legal system for effective conservation and management of fishery resources must be established.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.135-154
• /
• 2007

The 3 Northeast Asian countries of Korea, Japan and China have been stricter to each other than to other countries of out-region in air liberalization. The prominent reason of this intra-regional protective policy in air transportation seems to be the difference in competitive strength of their national flag carriers. As the 3 countries realize the importance of their mutual cooperation in the region, since China grows to be one of the leading economies in the world and the intra-regional trade and visitors increase tremendously, they are now taking the policy of intra-regional air liberalization more vigorously than before. Especially air cargo liberalization is easier than air passenger liberalization because they realize that the development of open economy is based on free flow of logistics regardless of the competitiveness of their national flag carriers. As Korea is the leading country in the region to promote air liberalization, this paper reviews the importance and growing trend of air cargo, analyzes current air liberalization policy between Korea, Japan and China and the initial effects of open sky in the routes of Shandung-Korea, and suggests the new policies of air liberalization to promote free flow of air logistics.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.46 no.4
• /
• pp.39-60
• /
• 2021

Despite the fast growth and rising importance of digital trade, there still exists no multilateral agreement governing digital trade. Significant differences in policy directions regarding key digital trade issues among the U.S., EU and China are the main stumbling blocks for reaching agreement on the multilateral front. To overcome this deficiency in digital trade rules, there has been active movement among mainly countries in the Asia-Pacific region for rule-making on digital trade. Starting with the CPTPP chapter on E-Commerce in 2018, there has been a series of digital trade rules agreed in bilateral or plurilateral formats, such as the USMCA, USJDTA, DEPA, DEA and RCEP. Korea is currently only member of RCEP, which contains an e-commerce chapter with lower levels of commitment as compared to other digital trade agreements. This paper provides a broad analysis of the recently concluded digital trade agreements, comparing the different coverage of rules, levels of commitment, and rules templates. The analysis aims to provide implications for the desirable direction of rule-making on digital trade and Korea's digital trade strategy.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.46 no.1
• /
• pp.155-168
• /
• 2021

The EU and the UK apply a treaty to establish new relations from 2021. Brexit is making a big difference in relations among the EU, the UK, and third countries. A new paradigm of international law has begun to be applied to relations among Korea, the EU, and the UK. The UK was excluded from the application of the Korea-EU FTA, and the Korea-UK FTA was applied to trade relations between Korea and the UK. The signing of these new treaties and the changes in the subject to which they apply are impacting the existing international legal system. The countries are showing some response, but it cannot be evaluated as a complete level, and there are still tasks to be solved. Therefore, the legal basis for EU-UK relations, Korea-EU relations, and Korea-UK relations should continue to be laid down in the future. The Korea-UK FTA cannot govern all the problems arising from trade and economic cooperation. Many interests that the UK did not reflect in the course of previous Korea-EU FTA negotiations will be revealed, so a new legal framework for Korea-UK bilateral relations will be established according to the negotiations between the two sides. There should be more detailed research and suggestion of alternatives in the field of law.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.25-46
• /
• 2010

In spite of great interest and recent innovation of the legislative system in the Arbitration and other Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) system, In Japan there have been only a few case in which International commercial dispute was settled through the Arbitration compared to other countries. However, we can easily expect that foreign arbitral awards which need to be recognized and enforced in Japan will gradually increase and this makes it very important for us to review the Japanese legislative system regarding recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. In this paper, I focused on the relations between applicable laws(including convention) regarding recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards in Japan and some issues concerning refusal of recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards. Japan is a member state of several multilateral conventions concerning recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards including the New York Convention of 1958 and at least 20 bilateral agreements which include provisions in relate to the recognition and enforcement of arbitral awards. Therefore there are some legal issues about the priority application between multilateral and bilateral agreements in relate to Article 7(1) of the New York Convention. In Japan, as I mentioned in this paper, there are incoherent opinions concerning this issue. To solve it substantially it would seem appropriate to build up concrete and explicit provisions concerning the application of priority between multilateral and bilateral agreements. On the other hand, in relate to the application between the New York Convention and National Law, it is necessary to take general approach regarding the priority application between Convention (Treaty) and National Law, considering the national application of conventions under the Constitutional System of each country. Among the grounds for non-recognition/enforcement, there are the ones that are decided under the law of the requested country, for instance, arbitrability and public policy. It would therefore be possible that some foreign arbitral awards would not be recognized in Japan especially relating to the arbitrability because its scope in Japan is not so large. Regarding the enforcement of awards annulled in their place of origin, some positive opinions in recent Japanese legal discussions, say that annulled awards should be enforced as a counter strategy of developed countries and judiciary discretion of the requested country would be needed. As mentioned in this paper, the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards is closely related to judicial policy of the requested country as the recognition and enforcement of foreign judgment is. Even though there existed uniform rules on recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards like the New York convention, each country has different internal legal status of conventions under its own Constitutional System and tends to interpret the provisions based in its own profit. Therefore, it is necessary to review, in the light of conflict of laws, the national legislative system including legal status of conventions of the requested countries concerning recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards.

• Journal of KIISE:Software and Applications
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.308-316
• /
• 2004

This paper proposed mediator agent system that guarantees reciprocity to attendances in bilateral negotiations for electronic commerce that is different from regular commercial transactions. The optimal agreement was supposed to provide the total maximum profits and the minimum difference in profits of both attendances in negotiations. In the mediator agent system, mediator agent conducted the negotiations considering multi attributes of product and Multi Attribute Utility Theory(MAUT) was applied to evaluate the profits of buyer and seller. 1'he negotiation model in mediator agent system was transformed into linear programming according to the information of bargain for attendances in negotiations. In order to compare with mediator agent system under the same conditions of reciprocity, another negotiation agent system was implemented using trade-off mechanism that is an algorithm for agent interactions in negotiation. The negotiation agent system using trade-off mechanism did not guarantee the optimal agreement, whereas mediator agent system provided attendances in negotiations with optimal agreement rapidly in comparison with trade-off mechanism.

• STI Policy Review
• /
• v.4 no.1
• /
• pp.27-53
• /
• 2013

Technology research and development (R&D) expenditures have increased as most countries recognize that technological innovation is a significant factor for continued economic growth. R&D subsidies by governmental entities were permitted in accordance with the Subsidy and Countervailing Measure (SCM) Agreement under the World Trade Organization (WTO) system. However, according to Article 31 of the SCM Agreement the provision for R&D subsidies have been terminated as of January 2000 and legal disputes over R&D subsidies are likely to increase. The aircraft industry has been the only industry where R&D subsidies have become an issue under the WTO. This paper examines international trade disputes within the aircraft industry in regards to measures by Canada and bilateral disputes between the U.S. and the European Communities (EC). In these cases, various R&D subsidies on civil aircraft are found to be inconsistent with WTO rules. This study summarizes the WTO decisions on various R&D subsidies disputed in the aircraft cases and examines the type of R&D subsidies found to be inconsistent (or consistent) with the WTO to provide guidelines for current and future R&D subsidy policies in high-tech industries. The Canada-Aircraft case indicates that R&D subsidies directly targeted towards near market R&D projects with a high export potential will likely be in violation of current WTO rules. Furthermore, findings from the EC-Aircraft and the U.S.-Aircraft cases suggest that the forms (or the methods) of R&D subsidy distribution were not a sufficient condition for the WTO ruling; instead, what ultimately mattered was whether and specifically to whom the benefits of the R&D subsidies are conferred by the government entities.

• Proceedings of the Society of Korea Industrial and System Engineering Conference
• /
• 2002.05a
• /
• pp.227-236
• /
• 2002

With agreement from the US, EU, and other countries, China joined in WTO(World Trade Organization) on December 1, 2001. So it is expected that Korea will not expand bilateral trade but also face severe competition with China for world and Chinese market. After Chinese accession to WTO, the aspect of Korean companies may be considered to be reduced the aspect of opportunity and risk by half. Accordingly, Korean domestic companies have to search countermeasures optimized to get global competition by considering the aspect of opportunity and risk. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to review the potential possibility of China as a world market and to provide countermeasures for major Korean domestic industries.