• Korean Journal of Human Ecology
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.29-43
• /
• 1999

This study was carried out to investigate the view of the choice of spouse and marriage of unmarried women's college students. Most respondents in this study think that the optimum age for marriage is 27 and prefer a seniority in age of 3-4 years who feels in love as the future husband. Also, they wish that the job of future husband be a technical expert. Approximately 63% of respondents recognize the necessity of marriage but 38% of respondents do not show a positive opinion for marriage. They also expect the emotional stabilization or partnership from marriage. Majority of respondents show a negative response to the marriage as means to solve economic difficulties. However, only 25.9% of respondents strongly show the negative opinion. In the acquaintance of the opposite sex in the purpose for marriage, most respondent are negative. However, they are positive in keeping virginal purity prior to marriage. Also, it has revealed that respondents want a partnership through allotment in domestic duties including baby sitting rather than household management through patriarchal system. In household economy, they prefer sharing living expenses and having a job after marriage. In choosing an ideal husband, although the academic background is considered as an important factor, but the present occupation is more important than the academic background. Also, one of the priority to choosing a spouse is influenced by each household circumstance and economic balance. About half of respondents want their parents-in-law to be alive, however, few respondents want to live together with parents-in-law.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.44 no.6
• /
• 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.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.461-494
• /
• 1999

This study is to analyse the applicability of governing law in multi-party contractual relationship of letter of credit. And this study is also to suggest the limits of the possibility of applicable law in multi-party contract. The contract of letter of credit constitutes complex relationship, i.e., applicant -beneficiary, applicant-issuing bank, issuing bank-intermediary bank ect. The law applicable to letter of credit should not use a singular governing law in all credit transaction as sales contract. To solve these problems, the author analysed the law applicable to the credit under multi-party contractual relationship as follow : (1) the principle of party autonomy (2) In the absence of express agreement with regard to the law applicable to the contract, lex loci contractus, lex loci solutionis, the law intended by the parties, the law with which contract is most closely connected. Accordingly, when attempting to ascertain the law governing the credit, it should be borne in mind that the credit involves several contractual relationships. I would like to conclude as follows: 1. The contract between the applicant and the Issuing bank is to be governed by the law of the country where the contract is made, and in which the bank carries on business and has issued the credit. 2. When it comes to the beneficiary-Intermediary bank relationship the following rule is given : The liability of an intermediary bank to the seller is governed by the law the country where the intermediary bank is operating if it is acting as principal. If, however, it is acting as agent(advising bank), it will be the law of the country where his principal is situate. 3. The contract between the beneficiary and the Issuing bank is governed by the law of the country where the payment is to be performed. 4. The contract between the Issuing bank and Intermediary bank is governed by 1) the law of the issuing bank is applicable if the intermediary bank only advises the credit, 2) the law of the issuing bank is applicable but if the intermediary bank makes payment, accepts or negotiates drafts against the tender of the documents, i.e., act as the bank dffecting the payment., 3) the law of the confirming bank is applicable if the irrevocable letter of credit is confirmed by the intermediary bank

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.23-46
• /
• 2021

Sports disputes have specific characteristics compared to disputes that arise in the field of commerce. One particularity is the judicial system in which the CAS plays a key role as the International Supreme Court for sports-related matters. The CAS Code applies whenever the parties agree to submit a sports-related dispute to the CAS(Art. R27). Once the parties to the arbitration agreement have decided that the CAS Code should govern their proceedings. The parties' autonomy is, however, limited to the provisions of the CAS Code that provide for such a corresponding autonomy. The application of the mandatory rules contained in the CAS Code cannot be excluded. In CAS appeals arbitration proceedings, the Panel shall decide the dispute according to the applicable sports regulations and, subsidiarily, to the rules of law chosen by the parties(Art. R58). In international sports disputes, the uniform application and interpretation of the relevant regulations are essential. Therefore, Art. R58 should be applied as a mandatory rule without any changes. Regulations of the sports organizations are to be qualified as valid rules of law. CAS panels may also apply the so-called lex sportiva to the merits before considering statutory provisions of national jurisdictions. In this way, the specificities in (international) sports disputes can be taken into account without the need to further examine the application of national legal standards.

• Management Science and Financial Engineering
• /
• v.19 no.2
• /
• pp.31-36
• /
• 2013

We propose a war-game model that is appropriate for a raid-type warfare in which, a priori, the maneuver of the attacker is relatively certain. The model is based on a multi-weapon extention of the Lanchester's law. Instead of a continuous time dynamic game with the differential equations from the Lanchester's law, however, we adopt a multi-period model relying on a time-discretization of the Lanchester's law. Despite the obvious limitation that two players make a move only on the discrete time epochs, the pragmatic model has a manifold justification. The existence of an equilibrium is readily established by its equivalence to a finite zero-sum game, the existence of whose equilibrium is, in turn, well-known to be no other than the LP-duality. It implies then that the war-game model dictates optimal strategies for both players under the assumption that any strategy choice of each player will be responded by a best strategy of her opponent. The model, therefore, provides a sound ground for finding an efficient reinforcement of a defense system that guarantees peaceful equilibria.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.161-182
• /
• 1999

The purpose of this paper is to examine the applicability of the UNIDROIT Principle in international commercial arbitration. For this purpose, I have studies the basic two characters of this Principles: One is of general rule(principle); Another is of international and commercial character. According to CISG, questions concerning matters governed by the CISG which are not expressly settled in it are to be settled in conformity with the general principles, so this Principles will cover many questions which are not expressly settled in the applicable law, by gap-filing, analogy or usage. In the preamble of this Principles, there are five cases in which the Principles shall be applied or may be applied. If the disputes are submitted to the any national court, the application of this Principles would be restricted because of the mandatory rules of national, international or supranational origin. But the disputes are submitted to arbitration, the arbitrator would have more discretional powers to apply the Principles than the judge. The reason is that in the arbitration, the arbitrators do not bear obligation to act in conformity with the law applicable by virtue of the rules of rules of private international law. I also examined the applicability of the Principles in cases which there are no mentions in preamble: When the international arbitrators choose the Principles; When the arbitrators decide ex aequo et bono; When the both parties have not chosen the governing law; When there are gaps in domestic law chosen by the parties; When the applicable domestic law is insufficient. In all these cases, the Principles may be applied more easily and conveniently in arbitration than in litigation. Thus to envisage the application of this Principle in international arbitration, first both parties in international commercial contracts should incorporate this Principle as a governing law in their contracts, and second, the arbitrators should try to apply this Principles in their arbitrations by choice, analogy, general principles or usage.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.229-260
• /
• 2011

European Union (EU) law has been a complex but at the same time fascinating subject of study due to its dynamic evolution. In particular, the Lisbon Treaty which entered into force in December 2009 represents the culmination of a decade of attempts at Treaty reform and harmonisation in diverse sectors. Amongst the EU private law fields, company law harmonisation has been one of the hotly debated issues with regards to the freedom of establishment in the internal market. Due to the significant differences between national provisions on company law, it seemed somewhat difficult to harmonise company law. However, Council Regulation 2157/2001 was legislated in 2001 and now provides the basis for the Statute for a European Company (or Societas Europaea: SE). The Statute is also supplemented by the Council Directive 2001/86 on the involvement of employees. The SE Statute is a legal measure in order to contribute to the internal market, and provides a choice for companies that wish to merge, create a joint subsidiary or convert a subsidiary into an SE. Through this option, the SE became a corporate form which is only available to existing companies incorporated in different Member States in the EU. The important question on the meaning of the SE Statute is whether the distinctive characteristics of the SE make it an attractive option to ensure significant numbers of SE registration. In fact, the outcome that has been made through the SE Statute is an example of regulatory competition. The traditional regulatory competition in the freedom of establishment has been the one between national statutes between Member States. However, this time is not a competition between Member States, which means that the Union has joined the area in competition between legal orders and is now in competition with the systems of company law of the Member States.Key Words : European Union, EU Company Law, Societas Europaea, SE Statute, One-tier System, Two-tier System, Race to the Bottom A quite number of scholars expect that the number of SE will increase significantly. Of course, there is no evidence of regulatory competition that Korea faces currently. However, because of the increasing volume of international trade and expansion of regional economic bloc, it is necessary to consider the example of development of EU company law. Addition to the existing SE Statute, the EU Commission has also proposed a new corporate form, Societas Private Europaea (private limited liable company). All of this development in European company law will help firms make their best choice for company establishment. The Delaware-style development in the EU will foster the race to the bottom, thereby improving the contents of company law. To conclude, the study on the development of European company law becomes important to understand the evolution of company law and harmonisation efforts in the EU.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.18
• /
• pp.27-62
• /
• 2002

The international sale contract is the central contracts in export-import transactions. A good sale contract or set of general conditions of sale will cover all the principal elements of the transaction, so that uncertainties are avoided. The parties' respective duties as concern the payment mechanism, transport contract and insurance responsibilities, inter alia, will all be clearly detailed in the contract. The following key clauses should be included in international contracts of sale and general conditions of sale: ${\bullet}$ preamble ${\bullet}$ identification of parties ${\bullet}$ description of goods ${\bullet}$ price and payment conditions ${\bullet}$ delivery periods and conditions ${\bullet}$ inspection of the goods - obligations and limitations ${\bullet}$ quantity or quality variations in the products delivered ${\bullet}$ reservation of title and passing of property rights ${\bullet}$ transfer of risk - how accomplished ${\bullet}$ seller's warranties and buyer's complaints ${\bullet}$ assignment of rights ${\bullet}$ force majeure clause and hardship clause ${\bullet}$ requirement that amendments and modifications be in writing ${\bullet}$ choice of law ${\bullet}$ choice of dispute resolution mechanism Under most systems of law, a party can be excused from a failure to perform a contract obligation which is caused by the intervention of a totally unforeseeable event, such as the outbreak of war, or an act of God such as an earthquake or hurricane. Under the American commercial code (UCC) the standard for this relief is one of commercial impracticability. In contrast, many civil law jurisdictions apply the term force majeure to this problem. Under CISG, the standard is based on the concept of impediments to performance. Because of the differences between these standards, parties might be well advised to draft their own force majeure, hardship, or excusable delays clause. The ICC publication, "Force Majeure and Hardship" provides a sample force majeure clause which can be incorporated by reference, as well as a hardship clause which must be expressly integrated in the contract. In addition, the ICC Model provides a similar, somewhat more concise formulation of a force majeure clause. When the seller wishes to devise his own excusable delays clause, he will seek to anticipate in its provision such potential difficulties as those related to obtaining government authorisations, changes in customs duties or regulations, drastic fluctuations in labour, materials, energy, or transportation prices, etc.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.26 no.7
• /
• pp.167-184
• /
• 2022

Purpose - This paper analyzes all possible issues that need to be considered in case disputes occur with regard to force majeure in international commercial contracts through the comparative study between English and Korean during COVID-19. Design/methodology - This paper belongs to the field of explanatory legal study, which aims to explain and test whether the choice of law is linked to the conditions that occur in the reality of judicial practice. The juridical approach involves studying and examining theories, concepts, legal doctrines, and legislation that are related to the problem. Findings - English law does not permit general economic impracticability to qualify as a valid force majeure event. If a party asserts that they were prevented from performing the contract, the courts will examine this strictly. Many commercial contracts in a broad range of sectors and industries are chosen by parties to be governed by English law. With COVID-19, there have been discussion of parties being released from performance as a result of force majeure. Meanwhile, under Korean law, a force majeure event should be unforeseeable and beyond a party's control. Since COVID-19 is a known event for future contracts, to avoid the risk that a similar situation in the future is deemed foreseeable and under a party's control, parties must ensure that such a risk is properly addressed in a contract. Therefore, it is necessary to have a new clause to cover a pandemic. Originality/value - In light of the ongoing unexpected and uncertain economic impacts COVID-19 is expected to bring to the world, it is anticipated that companies will experience an increased number of claims involving force majeure around the world, including English and Korea. As such, taking proactive steps to assess the applicable legal principles, including the concept of force majeure of contract, will help companies be prepared for the financial or legal implications of COVID-19. In this regard, it would be advisable for companies and businesses to take specific actions.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.227-251
• /
• 2014

In current law, the premium medical treatment system gives patients the right of choice between normal medical treatment service and premium medical treatment service. Only the doctors having a career more than a certain period of time fixed in the law are eligible for providing the premium medical treatment service. So, the premium medical treatment system is highly related to the patients' right to know and the right of self-determination. The system is also relevant to the so-called 'economic explanation' notion because patients should pay additional fee when they want to use this system. Meanwhile, the situation as follows is problematic as to this system. Although a patient applied for using the premium medical treatment system and the patient also chose his or her own doctor specifically, another doctor who was not selected as premium doctor could make a medical accident. Then, is the another doctor liable for damages because the accident was a medical malpractice or a breach of medical contract? In this study, we are going to examine the problems related with the premium medical treatment system. First, we examine the current law related to the system. Second, we look into the economic explanation duty and its application to the premium medical treatment system. Finally, we examine a real judgment case about a medical practice against the premium medical treatment system and we propose our solution to this case.