• 한국언론정보학보
• /
• 제38권
• /
• pp.211-244
• /
• 2007

현재 한국법원의 언론소송에서는 보도내용이 공적인물 공적존재 공직자 공적관심사와 관련이 있을 때 진실하지 않더라도 면책범위를 확대하고 있고, 나아가 악의적이거나 현저히 상당성을 잃은 공격이 아닌 한 위법성을 조각하고 있다. 그러나 보도목적과 보도내용의 공공성에도 불구하고 취재행위의 위법성은 엄격하게 법적 책임을 묻는다. 이 연구는 이러한 언론소송법 환경에서 불법도청에 직간접적으로 관여하지 않고 획득한 도청테이프에 담긴 내용이 공적인물의 공적인 관심사와 긴밀히 관련될 때, 그 내용을 보도한 행위의 위법성이 조각될 수 있는지를 검토하였다. 구체적으로 MBC 이상호 기자의 통신비밀보호법 위반행위가 사회상규에 반하지 아니하여 위법성이 조각된다는 원심과 달리, 사회상규에 반하여 위법성이 조각되지 않는다고 유죄 판단한 항소심 판결의 내용을 분석 평가하였다. 연구 결과 통신비밀의 침해를 방지함으로써 보호되는 법익과 공적관심사에 대한 언론보도의 자유를 보장함으로써 달성되는 법익을 조정함에 있어서 사회상규에 반하지 아니하여야 한다는 위법성 조각의 요건을 엄정하고 제한적으로 적용하는 것은 타당하고, 이러한 기준에 의거 이 사건보도의 목적정당성, 수단방법의 상당성, 법익균형성, 긴급성과 보충성 등의 요건을 검토할 때, 이 사건의 보도는 사회상규에 반하지 아니함으로 그 위법성을 조각시키는 것이 바람직하다고 판단하였다. 대통령제를 채택하고 있는 우리 헌법구조를 고려할 때 불법적인 방법으로 대통령선거, 나아가 국정을 농단하려고 도모하는 것이야말로 시와 때를 넘어서 국민들에게 알려져야 할 우리 사회의 가장 중대한 공익적 필요가 있는 사안이라고 할 것이기 때문이다. 그러나 통비법을 개정하여 위법성조각규정을 신설하자는 주장에 대하여 필자는 현대 사회에서 통신비밀보호의 중요성을 감안, 반대했다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권3호
• /
• pp.169-183
• /
• 2013

Egypt has gone through a major metamorphosis following the Egyptian Revolution that began on 25 January 2011. The aim of this article is to analyze the influence of the aforementioned metamorphoses on the Egyptian Arbitration Law and Practice and to shed light on the recent developments of the latter. Whilst positive legislative amendments have been recently achieved with regards to enforcement of arbitral awards, it is crystal clear that the January 2011 Revolution has negatively impacted the jurisprudence of the Administrative Court of the Conseil d'Etat which has annulled several arbitration clauses enshrined in contracts related to privatization. However, save for disputes arising from administrative contracts, Egypt has been and shall remain a friendly seat of Arbitration as it possesses an arbitration-friendly legislation, its Ordinary Judicial Courts are familiarized with international arbitration practice and it has a prominent and famous arbitration Centre.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제10권2호
• /
• pp.343-405
• /
• 2009

This paper is to discuss essential business of hospital business. While the labor world and ILO made continuous recommendation for improvements towards the compulsory arbitration system along with the controversy over unconstitutionality of the system, the Constitutional Court ruled that the system is constitutional on December 23, 1996(90hunba19) and on May 15, 2003 (2001hunga31). Despite this decision from the Constitutional Court, there has been much controversy over whether the compulsory arbitration system infringes the rights of collective action against the principle of trade union & labor relations adjustment which allows Commissioner of the Labor Relations Commission to decide on submission of arbitration by virtue of his/her authority in case where industrial disputes take place in the essential public-service businesses. The revision on the above provision was closely examined from the year 2003 and an agreement was made on the abolition of the compulsory arbitration system and the introduction of essential business with a grand compromise among labor unions, employers and the government on September 11, 2006 followed by revision(Essential business system enacted on January 1, 2008) of the Trade Union & Labor Relations Adjustment Act on December 30 in the same year. Accordingly, in order to perform the essential business, parties to labor relations must have an agreement or obtain a decision by the Labor Relations Commission before taking industrial actions. This paper firstly examined the concept of essential public-service businesses and essential business, legal meaning of essential business, procedures for making agreement and decision and legal effects. Secondly it intensively explored a theory against the principle of the legality which was raised from some part of society. In other words, it is claimed that a theory against the principle of the legality is not consistent with the rule of legislation and some abstract wording is against void for vagueness doctrine because part of crime constitution requirements is delegated to the Presidential Decree or to consultation among parties to labor relations. But analysis on the rule of legislation and void for vagueness doctrine reflected in the decision by the Constitutional Court led that argument for a theory against the principle of the legality is not reasonable. Close examination was done on a formal act of essential business agreement and necessity of prior agreement before submission of decision to the Labor Relations Commission which might have difficulties in performing work. In addition, an example agreement on hospital essential business is attached to help you understand this paper better.

• 한국컴퓨터정보학회논문지
• /
• 제18권12호
• /
• pp.167-177
• /
• 2013

사회 전반에 의료의 다원화 혹은 다변화를 요구하는 열망이 높아져 가고 있다. 이는 '대체의학'의 도입과 직결된 문제라 할 수 있다. 본 연구에서는, 최근 법률정보에 따르면 헌법재판소의 의료법에 대한 합헌결정으로 불거진 대체의학의 제도화 움직임을 시작으로 향후 대체의학의 제도화 모델을 결론으로 그 내용을 담았다. 이는 대체의학을 '왜' 도입하여야 하는가의 논의단계를 지나 '어떻게' 대체의학을 도입할 것인가의 문제로 논의의 방향성을 제시함과 동시에 선행연구들을 면밀히 분석하여 재조명하므로 써 지금까지 축적되어온 연구 자료들을 충분히 고찰 하고자 하였다. 헌법재판소 판결 및 대법원 판례를 바탕으로 대체의학으로 야기되는 법적 쟁점 사항을 분석하고 대체의료행위가 제도화 되기 위한 선결요건을 도출하였다. 또한 무분별하게 사용되고 있는 대체의학에 관한 용어사용을 재정립하고 향후 대체의학을 공인화 한다면 그 방법은 어떻게 되어야 하는지 그 방안을 제시, 방안 별 장단점을 분석하였다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제11권1호
• /
• pp.243-270
• /
• 2010

Under the existing law, an act included in medical practice by medical personnel seems to be irrelevant to whether the act concerned in the "Life World" is in the category of medical practice. In spite of the act having been done according to the custom for a long time, and generally done by individuals in the "Life World", these kinds of acts have been banned by law, because if these acts were done by the general individuals, it would be considered as harmful behavior to human life and body. And it is not sure that individuals know such a ban or notification. This cause a "Mistake of Law". Also it is happened if someone knows the existence of law but believes that his/her act is not included. For treating the problem of "Mistake of Law" of unlicensed medical act, in this study I inquired thoroughly into the category and regulation of unlicensed medical act, uncertainty of the Medical Services Law the first Section of Article 27, the prohibition of unlicensed medical act. The "Composition Condition" of the first Section of Article 27 of the Medical Services Law is not certain, it doesn't meet the "Doctrine of Clearance", and it cause the "Mistake of Law". Also it doesn't meet standardization of constitutional state. An exceptional decision of Pusan District Court, the debate about unlicensed medical practice, constitutional decision on unlicensed medical practice of the Constitutional Court of Republic of Korea and point of view of support of regulation. Also I examined the problem of "Mistake of Law" that the regulation of unlicensed medical practice has. I tried to solve uncertainty of "Composition Condition" and proposed a direction of regulation for solving the "Mistake of Law" and the use of existing law.

• 한국게임학회 논문지
• /
• 제10권1호
• /
• pp.65-78
• /
• 2010

이 논문은 2009년 2월 20일 미국의 제9 연방순회항소법원에서 내려진 Video Software Dealers Association v. Arnold Schwarzenegger 사건에 대한 판결의 의미와 한국게임법제도에의 시사점을 검토한 것이다. 이 사건에서 제9 연방순회항소법원은 폭력성 비디오게임을 18세 미만의 미성년자에게 판매하거나 대여하는 것을 금지하는 캘리포니아 주법(州法)이 미국 연방헌법에 명시된 미성년자 (minor)의 권리를 침해한다는 판결을 내렸다. 이에 비해서 한국의 헌법재판소는 청소년보호를 위한 청소년유해매체물 제도와 사전등급분류 제도에 대해서는 합헌이라는 결정을 하였다. 헌법재판소는 미국의 제9 연방항소법원의 판결과 같이 음란과 폭력성을 구분하여 접근하고 있고, 폭력성 개념이 대해서 간접적으로 위헌적이라는 결정을 한 바 있다. 미국법원의 덜 제한적인 수단의 선택이라는 법리와 헌법재판소의 최소침해성 원칙에서 본다면 청소년유해매체물 제도와 사전등급분류 제도의 중첩 적용은 문제될 수 있으며, 이 중에서 더 강한 규제가 위헌이 될 소지가 있다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제22권1호
• /
• pp.3-23
• /
• 2021

원격의료는 원격지에서 영상, 통화 등 기기를 사용하여 환자를 진단, 치료하는 의료의 한 분야이다. 환자를 대면하여 진단, 치료, 처방하는 전통적인 방식에서 벗어나, 원격에 있는 환자에게 의료를 제공하기 때문에, 의료 소외 지역, 거동이 불편한 환자에 도움이 될 것이고, 의사들은 공간적 제약을 벗어나 환자를 볼 수 있다는 장점이 있다. 하지만 의사가 환자를 대면 진료하는 것에 비하면, 진료의 질이 떨어지는 문제가 나타날 수 있어서, 허용 여부와 한계를 정하는 것도 필요하다. 원격의료 유형 중에서 의사가 환자를 원격에서 진료하고 처방전을 발행하는 것을 원격진료라고 정의할 수 있는데, 현행 의료법상 허용되는지에 대하여 법 해석이 일관되지 못하고 있다. 의료법 처방전 조항은 의사의 '진찰' 또는 '직접 진찰' 규정에 의하여 처방전을 발급한다고 규정하고 있는데, 이것을 대면 진료를 요구하는 규정이라고 해석하는 헌법재판소 결정과 일정한 제한 하에서 전화 처방을 인정할 수 있다는 대법원 판결이 대립하고 있다. 또한 의료법상 원격의료 규정에 의하여 명백하게 법상 허용되는 원격의료자문 외에 의사 환자 간 원격진료는 불법이라는 대법원 판결이 있다. 본 논문에서는 의료법 개정 연혁, 개정 이유 및 관련 의료법 조항과의 관련성을 통하여 원격진료에 대한 대법원 판례를 해석하고자 한다. 결론적으로 의료법상 처방전 규정에 의한, 의사의 직접 진찰 후, 처방전 발급 조항은 환자를 진찰한 의사가 처방전을 발급해야 한다는 처방전 발급 명의에 관한 의무 조항으로 해석하며, 의료법 원격의료 규정에 의하여 의사-환자 간 원격진료는 허용되지 않은 것으로 판단한다.

• 한국도서관정보학회지
• /
• 제6권
• /
• pp.187-211
• /
• 1979

Persons who are waiting for decision of the court concerning whether they are guilty or not after they are involved in the criminal case and detained in the special institution isolated from society, will desire to de found innocent and acquited or to be slightly punished. Inmates are the suspected persons and the accused persons who are detained in the correctional institution. They have the right to de assisted by lawyes in order to receive the favorable verdict in the court. However, the right of the poor and the ignorant, in reality, cannot be perfectly protected due to the imperfection and defect of the defense counsel system itself and its application. Therefore, as a means to guarantee the so-called access to the court, the fundamental constitutional right, the law libraries are established and the legal information services are provided to the inmates within the correctional institution in the advanced country such as the United States. In addition, the judicial precedent and the various kinds of professional organizations provide the managerial guide-lines for such libraries to enoughly collect materials and to provide the effective information services to the inmates. In order to furnish the management of the correctional institution of Korea with useful information, the legal information services, materials collected, and information service personnel of the law libraries within the correctional institution are minutely examined in this paper.

• 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.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권4호
• /
• pp.55-76
• /
• 2013

This study aims to analyze the main features of Mongolian arbitration system compared with Korean Arbitration Law which was revised under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Model Law. On the basis of this comparative study, certain differences are suggested: First, the environment of Mongolian arbitration is still insufficient in terms of its operation and usage at the international level. Second, the Mongol National Arbitration Court has established Ad-hoc Arbitration Rules and has promoted Ad-hoc Arbitration although it is an institutional arbitration organization. Third, the arbitration objects are defined as the types of tangible and intangible assets in Mongolia which are different from those of the Korean Arbitration Law. Accordingly, court and officer disputes, family disputes, labor-management relations, and criminal matters are covered by the arbitration objects. Fourth, Mongol Arbitration Law specifies the following persons disqualified for arbitrator appointment: the member of the Constitutional Court, judge, procurator, inquiry officer, investigator, court decision enforcement officer, attorney, or notary who has previously rendered legal service to any party of the disputes, and any officials who are prohibited by laws to be engaged in positions above the scope of their duties. Fifth, the arbitrator selection and appointment criteria should be documented, and the arbitrator should have the ability to resolve the disputes independently and fairly and achieve concord from both parties. Sixth, if there is no agreement between the parties, the arbitration language should be Mongolian, and the arbitral tribunal has no power to decide on it. Seventh, despite the agreement for a documentary hearing between the parties, there should be provided opportunities for an oral hearing if either of the parties requires it. Eighth, if the parties do not understand the language of the arbitration, the parties can directly ask the translation service. They should also keep secrets in the process of arbitration. Ninth, the cancellation of arbitral award is allowed by the application of the parties, not by the authority of the court. Except for the nine differences above, the Mongolian arbitration system is similar to that of the Korean Arbitration Law. This paper serves to contribute to the furtherance in trade relationship between Mongolia and Korea after the rapid and efficient resolution of disputes.