• 대한가정학회지
• /
• 제26권4호
• /
• pp.129-160
• /
• 1988

The purpose of the present study is to understand the change in the relation between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law according to the social change in comparison with the survey effects in 1974 (ko Jung-Ja) and 1985 to find out the cause of conflict in both side of power structure and affection structure, indicating behavior, the influences on the relationships among family, possible meditators. this thesis was made by an experimental research. Data were collected from 146 mothers-in-law and 141 daughters-in-law in Pusan. The collected data were analysed by statistical methods such is as follows, 1. cause of conflict In power structure the cause of conflict is, in the case of mother-in-law opinion opposion and shaughty attitude by daughter in-low and, in the case of daughter-in-law, domestic dominance. It is thought that there is a difference of viw\ew between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law about the possesion of economic dominance and many conflicts rises because of economic dominance. but the study in 1985 than 1974 suggests the possibility of conflict meditator because mother-in-law and daughter-in-law do homework dependently in the practice of power. In affection structure, the chief dissatisfaction toward daughter-in-law showes the change in time. In 1974, there was no affection and respect. In 1985, the rate of doing without consultation was high. Also, the lack of communication of mother-in-law and daughter-in-law is the cause of conflict. 2. Indicating behavior the rate of thinking alone if high in both sides. But in the survey of 1985, the covert verbal aggressive action with which mother-in-law appeals to her daughter and daughter-in-law to husband is rising. 3. Influence on the relationship among family by the conflict between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law. the conflict between mother-in-law and daughter-in-law play negative effects on the intimacy and relation between husband and wife. 4. Conflict mediation behavior As compremiser, it is suggested that in the case of daughter-in-law the position and role of husband is important and, in the case of mother-in-law respects mother-in-law, daughter-in-law and gives her the role.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제22권2호
• /
• pp.125-157
• /
• 2012

This study is to vindicate the vacation of arbitral awards in the United States. It focuses on the harmony of case law with statutory law of the United States. Until the early twentieth century, the American legal system, having adopted the English common law view, harbored a hostile attitude toward arbitration. The purpose of the Federal Arbitration Act (FAA) of the United States, enacted in 1925, was to eliminate the hostile attitude of courts toward arbitration. Congress is to enforce arbitration agreements into which parties have entered and to place arbitration agreements upon the same footing as other contracts. The structure of grounds for vacating arbitration awards has two layers. One is of vacating grounds with statutory origins, such as the FAA and the Uniform Arbitration Act, and the other, of vacating grounds originating from a nonstatutory, case law background. For a while, vacatur based on case law has coexisted with vacatur on statutory grounds for arbitration awards. After the Supreme Court decision in Hall Street Associates, L.L.C. v. Mattel, Inc., however, the justification of vacating based on case law has weakened. Post-Hall Street decisions of circuit courts show ways to deal with manifest disregard of the law. One of them is the harmonization of the case law grounds for vacating with the statutory grounds. It seems that the manifest-disregard-of-law and public-policy exceptions show a possibility of survival after Hall Street. However, other nonstatutory grounds for vacation of arbitration awards have no firm basis after Hall Street.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제57권
• /
• pp.3-34
• /
• 2013

In the international sales contract, long-term contracts often face hardship in fulfilling the original contract terms by relevant parties due to rapid change and uncertainty of political and economic circumstance. In this case, party who faces hardship of fulfillment terminates contract or demands adaptation to contract condition but if opponent doesn't accept this, it proceeds to commercial dispute needing legal interpretation. Generally it is wise to set forth governing law in contract between parties in the case of international contract, for legal stability. One of universal governing law which relevant parties select by agreement to solve economical hardship of fulfillment is PICC. PICC defines the hardship in detail for renegotiation on following hardship of fulfillment unexpected. In the case of failing renegotiation, Court(arbitral tribunal) conducts termination to contract or adaptation to contract condition through arbitration or mediation. In conclusion, when signing international long-term contract, it is desirous to handle dispute effectively by inserting provisions which can deal with economical hardship in contract or defining PICC as governing law in the case of hardship incurred. It is because it is realistic to handle dispute smoothly to the extent that both parties can be satisfied in the case of hardship incurred, though international contract should be fulfilled.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제44권6호
• /
• pp.1-21
• /
• 2019

In the case of a sea transport contract, the decision of the governing law, together with the choice of lex fori, shall be a legal issue in all legal disputes involving damage to the goods. In sea transport contracts, a paramount clause is often established in conjunction with the governing law clause, which can lead to conflict between these two clauses. Most B/L's back clauses contain a paramount clause that provides that the Hague Rules, Hague-Visby Rules, or foreign laws that prevail over other provisions of the terms. The Hague Rules and the Hague-Visby Rules, however, set different standards regarding the extent of the sea carrier's liability. Therefore, in the interpretation of ground conditions, it is an important question whether the Hague Rules or the Hague-Visby Rules are applied or whether each rule is applied as a law. For example, the paramount clause in the Superior Pescadores case was problematic in the interpretation of the term 'Hague Rules.' In this case, the English Court held that the expression 'Hague Rules' could be used to mean the Hague-Visby Rules, and not exclusively the Hague Rules. Therefore, the Hague-Visby Rules were applied in the judgment of this case, which suggests that this case can be a valuable precedent in future legal matters.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제29권
• /
• pp.39-61
• /
• 2006

The governing law in international commercial arbitration may be divided into governing arbitration law and governing substantive law. The former governs the parties' arbitration agreement and the conduct of any subsequent arbitration. But the later governs the parties' substantive rights and obligations, which means the law that governs contract formation and performance, and the law to be applied by the arbitrator to the merits of the dispute. The purpose of this paper is to examine how to determine the substantive governing law when there is express choice or implied choice between parties. Moreover this author checked any restrictions on party autonomy and also any possibilities to deviate from the governing law. In case of express choice the sources of the law or rules of law might be the national law of one of the parties, the neutral law, the general principles of law or lex mercatoria according to the arbitration law selected by the arbitral tribunal. Some arbitration laws or rules empower the arbitrator to decide the case ex aequo et bono or to act as amiable compositions. If the governing law could be determined expressly or impliedly by the parties, the arbitral tribunal would make a selection. In this case the criteria for selecting a governing law are not exactly same from country to country. But failing any indication by the parties as to governing law, the arbitral tribunal should apply the rules of law, the law or the law under the rule of conflict that the arbitrators consider applicable, according to the governing arbitration law. Among the connecting factors offered by the conflict rules, (which means the factors that the arbitrators consider applicable), some legal systems give precedence to the formation of the contract, other system to the place of performance of the contract, and others to the closest connection or centre of gravity. But the Rome Convention, which unified the conflict rules of the contracting states, gives precedence to the law of the domicile of the party which has to effect the performance which is characteristic of the contract. Finally this author suggested the Choice of Law Clause which covers governing substantive law and governing arbitration law at the same time. Thus the UNIDROIT Principles as well as any national law may be included as a governing law in international arbitration. So when we make sales or service contract, we should take into consideration of the UNIDROIT Principles as a governing law or a supplement to the governing law.

• 한국마린엔지니어링학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국마린엔지니어링학회 2006년도 전기학술대회논문집
• /
• pp.141-142
• /
• 2006

In relation to the determination of the appropriate choice of law in most of the maritime law issues, 'the law of the flag' or 'the law of the ship's nationality' is commonly used to apply to several provisions which is imposed in Korean Private International Law. But the theory of the law of the flag or ship's nationality suffers from serious problems in case of flag of convenience which is a flag flown by a vessel registered in one state, with which the vessel has few or no connections, while in reality the vessel is owned in or operated from another state. In this case, the article 8 of Korean Private International Law which stipulates the Exception of Choice of Law Clause can be applied to this matter, and thus it is essential to consider many factors which can be used in determining the applicable law through the most significant relationship or genuine link theory.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권3호
• /
• pp.21-45
• /
• 2020

The major legal issues of this case were governing law questions regarding the liability of the shipowner/employer to its employee. It is true that in the absence of the parties' choice of law, the arbitral tribunal may apply the substantive laws or rules of law which it deems appropriate. However, it does not mean that the arbitral tribunal has arbitrary discretion in choosing the appropriate law as the governing law of the case; rather, the arbitrators should carefully examine the conflict of law rules of the forum and the requirement of the law of the country where the upcoming arbitral award will be enforced. They must bear in mind the role of the "connecting factors" in determination of the governing law. Therefore, the application of an alien law, which has minimal connecting factor with the case, may lead to a conclusion that is hardly understood by the parties. On the same token, the arbitrators must pay attention to applying the mandatory rules of a country, the laws of which not being the governing law of the issue. It is said that the application of the mandatory rules is a necessary evil to secure the enforcement of the award in the country, which has national interest in applying its own law to the issue. Further, arbitrators must pay attention to the consistent application of the law and respect the integrity of a legal system to reach a fair conclusion. The place of service of a seafarer for a vessel navigating international sea ought to be its home port country rather than the country of the ship registry, and the party autonomy in choice of the law in a seafarer employment should be respected.

• 대한수학회지
• /
• 제47권5호
• /
• pp.1055-1075
• /
• 2010

In presented paper there were studied some properties of Benford's law. The existence of this law in not necessary large sets of numbers is a very interesting example that can show how the complex phenomena can appear in the positional number systems. Such systems seem to be very simple and intuitive and help us proceed with numbers. However, their simplicity in the case of usage in our lifetime is not necessary connected with the simplicity in the case of laws that govern them. Even if this laws indicate the existence of self-similar properties.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제27권1호
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2017

For recent years, several disputes between Korean consumers and multinational companies have arisen. Since the disputes were big and material that children's safety was at issue, a question started if Korean law properly has protected consumers' rights against multinational companies. While the Korean legal society tried to legislate punitive compensation with this concern, the U.S. Supreme Court reached an interesting case law regarding consumer contracts. A recent trend on consumer contracts in the United States shows that general terms have arbitration clause with class action waiver. As much as international arbitration has worked as the most effective resolution in international commercial disputes, the concept is still foreign and the experts are not approachable to lay individual consumers. However, class action in arbitration can hugely help for lay individual consumers to bring a case before arbitration tribunal. California courts consistently showed the analysis that the practical impact of prohibiting class action in arbitration clause is to ban lay individual consumers from fighting for their rights. However, the Supreme Court held that the arbitration clause shall be enforced as parties agree even if consumers practically cannot fight for their rights in the end. Even though consumer contracts are a typical example of lack of parity and of adhesive contract, the Supreme Court still applies liberalism that parties are equal in power and free to agree. This case law has a crucial implication since Korean consumers buy goods and services from the U.S. and other countries in everyday life. Accordingly, they are deemed to agree on the dispute resolution clauses, which might violate their constitutional right to bring their cases before the adjudication tribunal. This issue could be more important than adopting punitive compensation because consumers' rights are not necessarily governed by Korean law but by the governing law of the general terms and conditions chosen and written by the multinational companies. Thus this paper studies and analyzes the practical reality of international arbitration and influence of arbitration clause with class action waiver with the U.S. Supreme Court and California case laws.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제14권3호
• /
• pp.453-479
• /
• 2012

국제상거래의 증가는 분쟁의 증가로 나타나 소송이나 중재로 명확히 반영되고 있다. 국제상거래의 중요성에도 불구하고, 최근까지 어떻게 법이 실제 무역관행과 상호작용하는지 잘 알지 못하고 있다. 전 세계에 걸쳐 소송과 중재법정은 국제물품매매계약에서 CISG를 준거법으로 적용하고 있지만, 해결되지 않는 문제점에 대한 국제 판례가 축적되고 있다. 이런 점에서 국제 판례법에 대한 유니렉스(UNILEX) 데이터베이스는 대표적인 사례라 할 수 있다. 오늘날 확실히 CISG가 국제상사계약에서 중요한 역할을 담당하고 있지만, CISG가 경성법(hard law)으로서의 특징 때문에 갖는 한계로 준거법 적용에 따른 문제가 있다. 이에 비하여 UPICC는 국제협약이나 법률이 아닌 국제상거래일반의 법의 리스테이트먼트(restatement)이다. 즉 연성법(soft law)으로서 UPICC는 CISG보다도 유연하고 포괄적이다. 따라서 본 연구는 UPICC 2010년 개정에 착안하여 2012년 8월 현재까지 유니렉스(UNILEX)에 포함된 CISG와 UPICC의 적용사례 통계를 비교 분석하여 UPICC가 CISG의 한계를 보완하는 기능을 담당할 수 있음은 물론이고, 더 나아가 국제상거래의 준거법으로서 적용에도 유용성이 있음을 밝혀 UPICC의 국제상거래에서의 적용을 촉진하고자 한다.