• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.53-80
• /
• 2014

This article focuses on the Active Plan for Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) in financial Dispute. The financial consumers of Korea had suffered greatly from the IMF in 1997 and the global financial crisis in 2008, which also increased financial conflicts significantly. In particular, active financial transaction, due to the development of computer and financial techniques causes frequent consumer financial conflicts. It is beneficial to settle them for judicial economy through an alternative conflict arbitration system instead of lawsuit at the court. Many advanced countries settle financial conflicts through various ADR in their numerous financial conflicts. In the settlement of financial conflict, the ADR system, covering mediation and arbitration, is useful and appropriate. Each governmental institution has various conflict settlement organizations, and it is necessary to operate them effectively. In order to settle financial conflicts properly, it is necessary to study law on financial consumer protection, and it is also necessary to understand practical custom and practical knowledge and to systematize them. Further, it is important to manage financial conflict-related data, to accumulate professional experiences, and to prepare a financial conflict settlement system in order to introduce financial education earlier to the whole nation.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• 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.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제32권4호
• /
• pp.3-31
• /
• 2022

In the past, there has not been a law with the main purpose of preventing or preventing a risk in advance in order to protect the safety of patients in relation to medical services. It is evaluated that the enactment of the Patient Safety Act has a very important meaning in protecting patient safety as the top priority and further improving the quality of medical care. However, looking at the status of patient safety accidents reported to the Patient Safety Reporting System after the Patient Safety Act was enacted and implemented, various types of risk factors for patient safety still exist in the medical field. Meanwhile, Korea Consumer Agency and Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency, the existing domestic ADR specialized agencies, have been operating reasonable damage relief procedures such as recommendation of settlement, mediation, and arbitration according to the purpose of their establishment. Therefore, with the aimof broadening the choice of compensation system for patients, we propose the establishment and revision of ADR-related laws to apply the damage relief procedures of both institutions.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제8권2호
• /
• pp.101-117
• /
• 2006

"Online Alternative Dispute Resolution" can refer to the use of online methods of dispute resolution to resolve disputes arising either online or offline. The range of disputes covered by online ADR has been broad : from family law to internet domain name disputes : from small transaction to insurance disputes. Online and offline consumer disputes have been a major focus of online ADR sites. This article propsed that the mediator should explain the process and the mediator's role so as to forestall misunderstanding on that score. And mediators should consider including in either usual mediation agreements additional provisions applicable to communications by email. Online ADR sites should be designed 1) to provide a simple, easily understandable process, 2) to provide detailed information on process, cost and speed, 3) to enable users to move between online and offline processes, 4) to have authentication processes for parties and documents, 5) to have automatic translation system for language barriers. And Government should play an important role in assisting people to adapt technically and emotionally to new technology through information, training and ongoing support. The days of live online television-quality videoconferencing have not yet arrived. Until then, we must hone our skills with the written word.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권4호
• /
• pp.71-94
• /
• 2020

When a dispute or conflict occurs, standard methods for resolving them include resolution by trial or resolutions outside of courts. An alternative dispute resolution method called ADR that aims at remedying disputes instead of filing lawsuits is used commonly throughout the world, including the US and China. ADR, which is a remedy method outside of courts, includes negotiation, arbitration, or mediation between the concerned parties, and the arbitration system has several advantages. The Lemon Law is a consumer protection law of the United States that was enacted in 1975. This law prescribes that when specified quality standards are not met repeatedly due to defects in vehicles or electronic products, the manufacturer must provide exchanges or refunds to consumers. Korea also enacted a newly revised automobile management act, the Korea "Lemon Law," on January 1, 2019, which allows consumers to receive exchanges or refunds from the manufacturer if the same malfunction repeatedly occurs after purchasing a new automobile. There have recently been many cases of large fires occurring while driving import vehicles, causing huge public rage; therefore, interest is being focused on the revised automobile management act. Part 5-2 of the automobile management act was newly added to implement automobile exchange or refund arbitration systems. It is desirable to utilize the arbitration system to smoothly resolve automobile-related disputes that have recently increased significantly, and it is thus being used frequently for practical purposes.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제15권2호
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2005

The meaning of Online ADR lies in the prompt and economical resolution of disputes by applying the information/communication element (Internet) to existing ADR. However, if the promptness and economical efficiency are overemphasized, the fairness and appropriateness of dispute resolution may be compromised and consequently Online ADR will be belittled and criticized as second-class trials. In addition, as communication is mostly made using texts in Online ADR it is difficult to investigate cases and to create atmosphere and induce dynamic feelings, which are possible in the process of dispute resolution through face-to-face contact. Despite such difficulties, Online ADR is expanding its area not only in online but also in offline due to its advantages such as promptness, low expenses and improved resolution methods, and is expected to develop rapidly as the electronic government decided to adopt it in the future. Accordingly, the following points must be focused on for the continuous First, in the legal and institutional aspects for the development of Online ADR, it is necessary to establish a framework law on ADR. A framework law on ADR comprehending existing mediation and arbitration should be established and it must include contents of Online ADR, which utilizes electronic communication means. However, it is too early to establish a separate law for Online ADR because Online ADR must develop based on the theoretical system of ADR. Second, although Online ADR is expanding rapidly, it may take time to be settled as a tool of dispute resolution. As discussed earlier, additionally, if the amount of money in dispute is large or the dispute is complicated, Online ADR may have a negative effect on the resolution of the dispute. Thus, it is necessary to apply Online ADR to trifle cases or domestic cases in the early stage, accumulating experiences and correcting errors. Moreover, in order to settle numerous disputes effectively, Online ADR cases should be analyzed systematically and cases should be classified by type so that similar disputes may be settled automatically. What is more, these requirements should reflected in developing Online ADR system. Third, the application of Online ADR is being expanded to consumer disputes, domain name disputes, commercial disputes, legal disputes, etc., millions of cases are settled through Online ADR, and 115 Online ADR sites are in operation throughout the world. Thus Online ADR requires not temporary but continuous attention, and mediators and arbitrators participating in Online ADR should be more intensively educated on negotiation and information technologies. In particular, government-led research projects should be promoted to establish Online ADR model and these projects should be supported by comprehensive researches on mediation, arbitration and Online ADR. Fourth, what is most important in the continuous development and expansion of Online ADR is to secure confidence in Online ADR and advertise Online ADR to users. For this, incentives and rewards should be given to specialists such as lawyers when they participate in Online ADR as mediators and arbitrators in order to improve their expertise. What is more, from the early stage, the government and public institutions should have initiative in promoting Online ADR so that parties involved in disputes recognize the substantial contribution of Online ADR to dispute resolution. Lastly, dispute resolution through Online ADR is performed by organizations such as Korea Institute for Electronic Commerce and Korea Consumer Protection Board and partially by Korean Commercial Arbitration Board. Online ADR is expected to expand its area to commercial disputes in offline in the future. In response to this, Korean Commercial Arbitration Board, which is an organization for commercial dispute resolution, needs to be restructured.

• 법제연구
• /
• 제44호
• /
• pp.343-386
• /
• 2013

우리나라의 금융ADR제도는 금융감독당국인 금융감독원 및 그 안에 설치되는 금융분쟁조정위원회가 제도운영의 주체가 되는 이른바 "금융분쟁조정제도"로 대표된다고 할 수 있고, 이를 흔히 "행정형 금융ADR제도"라고 평가하고 있다. 이 제도는 금융위원회설치법(1997)에 의해 1999년경에 도입되어 10여년에 걸친 제도운영의 성과를 축적하여 현재에 이르고 있다. 그런데 정작 우리나라에서 금융ADR제도가 주목받기 시작한 것은 대체로 2008년의 이른바 금융위기 이후에 금융소비자보호가 강조되기 시작하면서이다. 금융거래를 통하여 피해를 입은 금융소비자를 보호하기 위한 제도적 방안의 하나로 "소송외적 분쟁해결제도(이른바 ADR)"에 대한 관심이 높아졌기 때문이다. 그나마 우리나라 금융ADR제도에 관한 논의는 주로 감독체제 개편과 관련하여 금융ADR기관의 운영주체를 누구로 할 것인가에 집중되었다는 점에 특이성이 있고, 우리 금융ADR제도의 특징을 객관적인 입장에서 면밀하게 분석한 위에 제도개선의 방향성을 제시하는 논의는 충분하게 이루어졌다고 할 수 없다. 본고는 이와 같은 점들을 문제의식으로 하여 우리나라의 금융ADR제도의 특징을 분석하여 하나의 제도모델로 구체화하고, 이를 통하여 제도의 문제점을 분명히 하고 그 개선방향을 제시하고자 하였다. 우리나라 금융ADR제도는 "행정형 통합형 합의형+집행력 부여형(준사법형) IDR비전치형(ADR기관내 합의권고형)"의 특징을 갖는 제도모델로 평가할 수 있다. 그러나 준사법형 효력모델을 채택하면서도 제도의 실효성확보를 위한 제도적 기반을 갖추지 못하고 있고, 통합형 ADR기관의 제도운영의 부담이 크다는 두 가지 문제점을 극복하여야 하는 과제를 동시에 안고 있다. 그러한 관점에서 본고는 현행 제도의 실효성 확보와 업계자율형 ADR제도(특히 IDR전치형 제도)의 확충을 위한 개선방안을 제시하였다. 특히 제도의 실효성확보 방안으로서 조정안에 편면적 구속력을 부여하지 않고도 조정성립율을 높일 수 있는 방안이 제도개선으로서는 최선책이라는 전제 하에 내부의 인원확충을 도모하고 조정절차 및 효력을 차등화하는 방안, 금융기관이 조정절차 중에 소송으로 도피하는 문제점을 해결하기 위하여 피신청인인 금융기관은 합의권고 또는 조정안을 제시받기 전에는 소를 제기하지 못하도록 규제하는 방안, 소송과의 연계제도로서 소송절차의 중지제도 외에 시효중단효를 부여하는 방안을 각각 제시하였다.