• Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.12 no.6
• /
• pp.59-66
• /
• 2011

• The Korean Journal of Pain
• /
• v.28 no.4
• /
• pp.254-264
• /
• 2015

Background: Pain medicine often requires medico-legal involvement, even though diagnosis and treatments have improved considerably. Multiple guidelines for pain physicians contain many recommendations regarding interventional treatment. Unfortunately, no definite treatment guidelines exist because there is no complete consensus among individual guidelines. Pain intervention procedures are widely practiced and highly associated with adverse events and complications. However, a comprehensive, systemic review of medical-dispute cases (MDCs) in Korea has not yet been reported. The purpose of this article is to analyze the frequency and type of medical dispute activity undertaken by pain specialists in Korea. Methods: Data on medical disputes cases were collected through the Korea Medical Association mutual aid and through a private medical malpractice liability insurance company. Data regarding the frequency and type of MDCs, along with brief case descriptions, were obtained. Results: Pain in the lumbar region made up a major proportion of MDCs and compensation costs. Infection, nerve injury, and diagnosis related cases were the most major contents of MDCs. Only a small proportion of cases involved patient death or unconsciousness, but compensation costs were the highest. Conclusions: More systemic guidelines and recommendations on interventional pain management are needed, especially those focused on medico-legal cases. Complications arising from pain management procedures and treatments may be avoided by physicians who have the required knowledge and expertise regarding anatomy and pain intervention procedures and know how to recognize procedural aberrations as soon as they occur.

• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.22 no.6
• /
• pp.76-86
• /
• 2021

Construction projects have high potentials of claims and disputes due to inherent risks where a variety of stakeholders are involved. Since disputes could cause losses in terms of cost and time, it is a critical issue for contractors to forecast and pro-actively manage disputes in advance in order to secure project efficiency and higher profits. The objective of the study is to develop a decision tree-based predictive analytics model for forecasting dispute types and their probabilities according to construction project conditions. It can be a useful tool to forecast potential disputes and thus provide opportunities for proactive management.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• 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.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.280-291
• /
• 2021

Background: Based on the fact that the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency is a public institution established by social demands for medical disputes, this study reviews the publicness of public organization and discusses its policy implications. Methods: Through Moore's strategic triangle, which consists of legitimacy and support, public value and operational capacity, the process of creating public value is examined. For the analysis, case studies were conducted using related literature data from 2012, when the agency was established, to the present. Results: As a result of the analysis, first, the related law examined in the operational capability has been revised dozens of times, but the revised law has its own contradictions and limitations. The human resource system is also being improved, but there is a problem with the fairness and reliability of the arbitration process, especially due to the limitations of the appraiser system. Second, in terms of legitimacy and support, a regional gap occurred despite efforts to improve accessibility through the expansion of the organization. And the arbitration agency failed to reconcile conflicts caused by stakeholders' perception of each other as a trade-off relationship. Third, the public value result shows that, despite many explicit (statistical) achievements, citizens' use of the past dispute resolution means (litigation) has not decreased. Likewise, the perception of value makers (citizens) is important for creating public value as an invisible result, but it has not yet been formally investigated, so the performance can not be recognized. Conclusion: While the organization's efforts for continuous change and improvement are encouraging, it is not perceived as a better means of resolving disputes and improving quality of services. Therefore, it is necessary to reconsider the institutional design centered on value creators.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.183-195
• /
• 2022

Purpose - The study attempted to analyze how the U.S.-China trade dispute affects a highly trade-dependent South Korea. Currently, major domestic and international institutions have issued a number of conflicting predictions that the trade dispute between China and the United States will have a positive and negative impact on South Korea. Accordingly, the present study attempted to analyze using actual data. Design/methodology/approach - The analysis was conducted using actual import and export data from the United States and China and actual import and export data from the United States and China from South Korea. The analysis measured the number and amount of imports and exports by year and month, and the rate of increase and decrease. We also looked at trade dispute days, import and export outcomes and what the impact was. In addition, as a result of the US-China trade dispute, the amount of change in Korea's imports and exports was analyzed. Findings - Empirical analysis shows that South Korea's exports to the United States and China have increased. The analysis results are as follows. First, exports to the United States increased by 5.65% in 2018 and 6.45% in 2019 compared to 2017. Second, exports to China surged 12.34% in 2018 compared to 2017. This increase in South Korea's exports to the United States and its mass exports to the United States shows that South Korea has benefited from the trade dispute between the United States and China. Research implications or Originality - South Korea, which is highly trade-dependent, has been heavily affected by the U.S.-China trade dispute. Various predictions are made about this. The analysis showed that South Korea's export volume has increased. In the end, the effect of the trade transition to the 3rd country did not occur. Rather, the U.S.-China trade dispute appears to have helped South Korea.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.27-46
• /
• 2011

In the intellectual based society of the 21th century, intellectual property of nation and enterprise management has been the key element of nation's competitiveness and development. Therefore in countries like Korea, China, and many other countries, intellectual property of advancement strategy are being constructed and intellectual properties are protected at national level. Top priority task of protecting the intellectual property is to efficiently resolute intellectual property right disputes. Considering the nature of intellectual property right and arbitrage system, arbitration to solve intellectual property disputes is realistically the best method. However, not all cases of them are qualified. In order to relieve the intellectual property disputes through arbitration, qualification must be obtained. During the process, generally and globally, intellectual property right dispute is evaluated by three parts, intellectual property right contract dispute, intellectual property right violation dispute, and intellectual property right validity dispute. Based on UN's "Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards Agreement" in 1958, June 10th, in New York, both arbitrage organization and judgment can be approved in both Korea and China countries. However, as of today, there is a big gap of arbitration qualification between two countries, which can be troublesome if intellectual property right disputes arise. For instance, in Korea, intellectual property right contract disputes and intellectual property right violation disputes are both generally accepted as arbitration qualification. However for intellectual property right validity dispute, arbitration qualification is only accepted for non-registered intellectual property as in copyright entity. It does not apply to other registered intellectual property right as in patents. In China, arbitration qualification is accepted for intellectual property right contract dispute, and also accepted for intellectual property right violation dispute to copyrights but restricted to others. As for intellectual property right validity dispute, arbitration qualification is completely denied. Therefore, when there is an intellectual property right dispute between Korea and China, the biggest problem is whether China will accept arbitrage judgments made in Korea. Theoretically, arbitrage judgement made in Korea should be also accepted in China's court. However, considering the criticism of China's passive nature of arbitration qualification for its own local intellectual property right disputes, it's very unlikely they'll actively accept arbitrary judgment made in foreign countries. Korea and China must have a more open minded approach for intellectual property disputes and arbitration qualification. Base on WTO's Intellectual Property Right Agreement, it's being defined as private right. Therefore, sovereign principle should be the basic principle of solving intellectual property right disputes. Currently, arbitration qualification is expanding internationally. So both Korea and China must also follow the trend expand the arbitration qualification with a more open minded and forward looking approach, for the good of intellectual property disputes.

• International conference on construction engineering and project management
• /
• 2005.10a
• /
• pp.681-686
• /
• 2005

This paper discusses the role of construction management (CM) profession in claims management. It reviews the attitudes, psychology and practices relevant to CM knowledge. It is the purpose of this paper to highlight CM profession's knowledge in this area as this profession's core competence in contemporary construction.

• Journal of Oral Medicine and Pain
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.163-199
• /
• 2005

Dentistry had been considered to be a relatively safe zone from the risk of medical accidents for there are less number of emergency cases. However, in these days, the number of medical dispute is increasing that the dentists would not be able to overlook it as if it is none of their matters. Hence, researches on various medical accidents and analyses on related matters to seek proper management have been carried out recently, but the datas are not enough yet. This study analysed the actual conditions of medical accidents as well as disputes and the general awareness of dental practitioners in local clinics with the purpose of understanding the general situation and to suggest counterplan. The study was conducted by analysing 1,882 questionnaires collected from total of 3,684 dentists belonging to Seoul Dental Association and where Doctors and Hospitals Medical Malpractice Insurance for dentists is administered. The results were as follows: 1. 98.47% of the respondents doubted the risk of medical accident and dispute. 2. 27.42% of the respondents experienced medical dispute, and there was no significant difference between the rate of medical disputes and the resident training. 3. Among the cases of medical accidents, those related to the periodontal/operative treatment showed the highest rate of 20.50%, and that related to implant treatment was 6.17%. 4. 43.02% of the respondents explained about the treatment procedure before the treatment while 25.90% started the treatment without consent of the patients. 5. Medical dispute resulted from not having any explanation or consent of the patients were of 16.55%. 10.26% had difficulties in solving the problem for missing the medical records. 6. 49.73% responded to be capable of administering first aid treatment. Among them, 23.60% were equipped with accurate knowledge regarding the emergency care. 7. During medical dispute, 88.09% sought counsel from other dentists, and Local district dental association was found to be the most frequently asked group. 8. In cases of medical dispute, 5.26% of the respondents were asked to submit relevant data from customer protection organization, and among them, 75.61% acceded the demand sincerely. 9. After the settlement of the dispute, 83.63% recovered relatively stable state of mind. 10. 99.46% of the respondents felt the necessity of medical dispute management organization, and 78.58% responded that it was urgent. 11. 66.70% of the respondents joined Doctors and Hospitals Medical Malpractice Insurance, although they had not experienced medical dispute. However, 73.36% of the respondent were not aware of it, and 93.36% of the members were not aware of the procedure of the dispute settlement. 12. 79.0% of the respondents who joined the Doctors and Hospitals Medical Malpractice Insurance still felt confused when medical dispute occured, but relatively safer than before. 13. When medical dispute was settled through Doctors and Hospitals Medical Malpractice Insurance, 71.92% of the dentists were contented more than moderately, however, 35.16% of the patients were contented. 14. For complement of Doctors and Hospitals Medical Malpractice Insurance, 53.22% of the respondents felt that insurance company, dentist, and patient should all participate in bringing mutual agreement for quick settlement of the dispute. In addition, 29.08% of the respondents wanted insurance company to prevent patients from disturbing their practices. From the above results, improvement of the general awareness on increasing rate of medical disputes, and education as well as complementary measures for settlement of the disputes are required.

• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.7 no.6
• /
• pp.99-111
• /
• 2006

Of the numerious dispute resolution methods, Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) is the most highly recommended approach for the guarantee bond-related dispute. In reality, however, claims were not resolved satisfactorily through ADR because of the lack of reference materials for negotiation, thus those were frequently had to be resolved through litigation. The above fact implies that, it is required to seek an efficient way to resolve the bond-related claims prior to they progress to litigation. This research paper intensively investigated judicial precedents of 232 cases with regard to construction bond-related disputes that observed during the analysis period(2000-2004). According to the summary statistics, it turned out that litigation were time consuming and potential economic loss was tremendous; on average, it takes 1067 days(the longest case was 1965 days) for dispute resolution. It suggests that litigations should be discouraged considering the magnitude of potential loss of stake holders. Research results revealed that there are some significant differences between categories in some variables affecting to the rate of winning; i) the number of lawsuit deputies of a plaintiff (in the 1st trial), ii) dispute locations (in the 1st and 3rd trials), iii) contract price (in the 1st trial), iv) contractors' operating capability (in the 1st and 2nd trials). For the rest of variables, significance level between categories was too low for preparing efficient improvement plan. Despite the important implications drawn from the analysis, this research has limitation due to the several reasons such as data structure, the depth of Information, etc. Therefore, more systematic research should be followed in the future.