• East Asian Journal of Business Economics (EAJBE)
• /
• v.10 no.2
• /
• pp.71-80
• /
• 2022

Purpose - It is chaotic when doing a business without legal patterns and rules; individuals who make legal decisions without legal consideration are often protecting their interests and forgetting others. This study aims to suggest key solutions how companies can make better decision based on legal considerations through investigation comprehensive literature analysis. Research design, Data, and methodology - This research conducted qualitative textual method and a technique called 'Qualitative Comparative Analysis' (QCA) can be used to understand better why certain things change while others do not. In tough situations, QCA is a strategy for comparing several occurrences. Result - Total six considerations were founded by the QCA for better corporate decision. Based on these considerations, all stakeholders, shareholders, and every employee should nominate and vote on one person to be their leader in the organization; fair practices in choosing the governor of the organization through legal binding will bring peace and order to the company. Conclusion - It was time consuming to go through every detailed material that entails legal consideration in making corporate decision. The concept of same profile in the research is critical whereby many authors are using same concept to write their articles and books. Using pure concept from one source limits the research and gives inadequate information.

• Journal of KIISE
• /
• v.43 no.2
• /
• pp.163-176
• /
• 2016

The contention overhead on the same channel in an NoC architecture can significantly increase a communication delay due to the simultaneous communication requests that occur. To reduce the overall overhead, we propose task-to-tile binding techniques for an NoC-based manycore platform, whereby it is assumed that the task mapping decision has already made. Since the NoC architecture may have multiple memory tiles as its size grows, memory clustering is used to balance the load of memory by making applications access different memory tiles. We assume that the information on the communication overhead of each application is known since it is specified in a dataflow task graph. Using this information, this paper proposes two heurisitics that perform binding of multiple tasks at once based on a proper memory clustering method. Experiments with an NoC simulator prove that the proposed heurisitic shows performance gains that are 25% greater than that of the previous binding heuristic.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.123-148
• /
• 1998

Recently many controversies originate for varies reasons, ranging from normal market competition to honest disagreements about rights. Disputes also arise from the clash between institutions and individuals. A free society should provide many systems for resolving controversies. We think of the courts as being primary, but, of course, they are not. In Korea, and in most other parts of the world, disagreements are resolved informally, without the need for judicial intervention. Settlements are worked out privately, usually without lawyers and certainly without judges. Most of judges are finding it difficult to cope with the needs and demands of society. Many businessmen who no longer want to get involved in lawsuits, are looking for alternative methods for resolving their disputes. However, there are actually two systems, litigation and arbitration only, to resolve disputes with binding both parties concerned. Litigation emphasizes on the equity and the justice with allowing three time's judgment for the resonable resolution, and arbitration, which is not subject to appeal, stress on the economic settlement rather than justice. Arbitration process results in a final and binding decisions. Although arbitration is a voluntary procedures that is created by the parties themselves, arbitration differs from mediation and conciliation because of its binding power. Arbitration is today coming into fashion as our primary methods for settling disputes. No company wants to have its funds tied up for long periods. Many parties prefer that the decision be final, rather than facing the prospect of extended appellate litigation. Therefore, government must encourage parties to settle their disputes by arbitration instead of litigation.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• 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

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.519-546
• /
• 2004

On June 27, 2002 Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) launched dot-ca domain name dispute resolution service through BCICAC and Resolution Canada, Inc. The Domain name Dispute Resolution Policy (CDRP) of CIRA is basically modelled after Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy(UDRP), while the substance of CDRP is slightly modified to meet the need of Canadian domain name regime and its legal system. Firstly, this article examined CIRA's domain name dispute resolution policy in general. It is obvious that the domain name dispute resolution proceeding is non-binding arbitration to which arbitration law does not apply. However it still belongs to the arbitration and far from the usual mediation process. Domain name arbitrators render decision rather than assist disputing parties themselves reach to agreement. In this respect the domain name arbitration is similar to arbitration or litigation rather than mediation. Secondly it explored how the panels applied the substantive standards in domain name arbitration. There is some criticism that panelists interprets the test of "confusingly similar" in conflicting manner. As a result critics assert that courts' judicial review is necessary to reduce the conflicting interpretation on the test of substantive standards stipulated in paragraph 3 of CDRP. Finally, it analysed the court's position on domain name arbitral award. Canadian courts do not seem to establish a explicit standard for judicial review over it yet. However, in Black v. Molson case Ontario Superior Court applied the UDRP rules in examining the WIPO panel's decision, while US courts often apply domestic patent law and ACPA(Anticyber -squatting Consumer's Protection Act) to review domain name arbitration decision rather than UDRP rules. In conclusion this article suggests that courts should restrict their judicial review on domain name administrative panel's decision at best. This will lead to facilitating the use of ADR in domain name dispute resolution and reducing the burden of courts' dockets.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.57
• /
• pp.79-108
• /
• 2013

International transactions of plant and construction project need to time to time for completing the contract. During the performing the contract there may arise many claims and disputes it should be settled rapidly for processing schedule of works. However, arbitration and litigation for settlement of dispute are inappropriate in time and expense under the specifications of plant and construction project. Dispute boards are one of the successful resolution method of dispute prior to litigation or arbitration. If the dispute board was failed, of course, it may be allowed to continue into litigation or arbitration. As the creative methods of parties agreement, dispute boards may be expected to avoid claims and dispute in long and medium international contract. The purpose of this paper is to explore the specification and limitations of dispute boards that may clear disputes under long and medium contract of construction and procurement. It needs to be understand to determine whether is the useful methods for resolving dispute in the international project. This paper considers the specific natures of dispute board and its rules, procedures and problems including ICC and FIDIC for the contract of long and medium transaction.

• Bulletin of the Korean Chemical Society
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.111-116
• /
• 2008

A piperazinylalkylisoxazole library containing 86 compounds was constructed and evaluated for the binding affinities to dopamine (D3) and serotonin (5-HT2A/2C) receptor to develop antipsychotics. Dopamine antagonists (DA) showing selectivity for D3 receptor over the D2 receptor, serotonin antagonists (SA), and serotonin-dopamine dual antagonists (SDA) were identified based on their binding affinity and selectivity. The analogues were divided into three groups of 7 DAs (D3), 33 SAs (5-HT2A/2C), and 46 SDAs (D3 and 5-HT2A/2C). A classification model was generated for identifying structural characteristics of those antagonists with different affinity profiles. On the basis of the results from our previous study, we conducted the generation of the decision trees by the recursive-partitioning (RP) method using Cerius2 2D descriptors, and identified and interpreted the descriptors that discriminate in-house antipsychotic compounds.

• Journal of the Institute of Electronics and Information Engineers
• /
• v.50 no.4
• /
• pp.83-88
• /
• 2013

Many studies adopting brain functions to the engineering systems have been made for recent years as the brain Science has developed. If we investigate the parts which take part in memorizing and emotional process, we can know that Hippocampus of memorizing center and Amygdala of Emotional center closely cooperate each other. Actually Knowledge effects on Emotion and Emotion effects on Knowledge. During the human decision making, emotional factor has much important effects on Decision making process. For implementing more delicate intelligent system, the knowledge base coupled to emotional factor should be designed. Accordingly in this paper starting from the idea of cooperating system between Hippocampus and Amygdala,, we design Knowledge Emotion Binding System and propose Emotional changing mechanism by Memory retrieval and knowledge reasoning process.

• The KIPS Transactions:PartD
• /
• v.16D no.5
• /
• pp.791-800
• /
• 2009

Recently, the business process family model (BPFM), which is new approachfor assuring businessflexibility and enhancing reuse in application development with service oriented architecture (SOA), was proposed. The BPFM is a model which can explicitly represent the variabilities in business process family by using the variability analysis method of software product line. Many business process models (BPM) can be generated automatically through decision and pruning processes from BPFM. At this time, the variabilities tend to have inclusive or exclusive dependencies between them. This affects the decision and pruning processes. So far, little attention has been given to the binding information of variability dependency in the BPFM. In this paper, we propose an approach for analyzing various types of dependency relationships between variabilities and representing the variability and their relationships as a dependency analysis model. Additionally, a method which can trace the variabilities affected by a decision on the dependency analysis model is presented. The case study shows that the proposed approach helps to reduce the number of variability decision and to solve a disagreement of functions in BPM produced by incorrectly deciding the variability.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.3-30
• /
• 2022

On 27 October the Supreme Court of UK handed down its much anticipated decision in Kabab-Ji SAL (Lebanon) v Kout Food Group (Kuwait) [2021] UKSC 48. The issues for the Supreme Court to decide were as follows: (1) which law governed the validity of the arbitration agreement; (2) if English law applied, whether, as a matter of English law, there was any real prospect that a court might find that KFG became a party to the arbitration agreement, and (3) whether, procedurally, the Court of Appeal was correct in giving summary judgment refusing recognition and enforcement the award, or whether there should have been a full rehearing of whether there was a valid and binding arbitration agreement for the purposes of the New York Convention and the AA 1996 (the 'procedural' issue) The decision in Kabab-Ji provides further reassuring clarity on how the governing law of the arbitration agreement is to be determined under English law where the governing law is not expressly stated in the arbitration agreement itself. The Supreme Court's reasoning is consistent with its earlier decision on the same issue, albeit in the context of enforcement pursuant to the New York Convention, rather than considering the arbitration agreement before an award is rendered. This paper presents some implications of Kabab-Ji case. Also, it seeks to provide a meaningful discussion and theories on the arbitration system in Korea.