• KDI Journal of Economic Policy
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.3-36
• /
• 1992

"Corporate control by owners" characterizes the current structure of ownership, control and management of big business groups in Korea. It has become an ever more serious obstacle for the Korean economy to end its distinctive "personal capitalism" and to transform the current system into people's capitalism. The current issue, the deconcentration of ownership, through the course of heated debates should be treated from an integrated perspective. That is, the debate should center on the concentration of economic power and it effects on national economy, instead of sticking to the issue of ownership-control issue per se. This paper, by referring to the historical experiences and development paths which advanced countries have already traveled, analyzes the respective aspects of the concentration issue in a rather descriptive and taxonomist manner - market concentration, business diversification, ownership concentration, integrated management of conglomerates, i.e., managing in groups' unit, and the roles of financial institutions. The government policies against the concentration of economic power have so far focused on the size of big business groups and their diversification activities. The two major policy measures are restrictions on cross-ownership and excess capital investment by big business groups, and controls on their credit deals. This paper strongly suggests that the government should change its current priorities in targeting its policies against concentration. The government should reduce the regulations on size and diversification, and focus its policies on substantial dispersion of corporate ownership. The efficacy of government intervention in the management and control of business enterprises seems quite dubious and even anachronistic given the extent of maturity of Korean firms. Therefore, it should be noted that the current regulation-oriented stance taken by the government against the management style of big business groups should be suppressed, as it has assumed some a priori and typical pattern in advance in directing big business groups, such as independent and specialized management in respective firms' unit. This paper, also, raises the need for introducing new regulations on inter-sectoral diversifications between finance, industry and the press.

• Journal of Chest Surgery
• /
• v.39 no.7 s.264
• /
• pp.534-543
• /
• 2006

Background: There are a lot of debates regarding the optimal timing of operation of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). Off pump coronary artery bypass grafting (OPCAB) has benefits by avoiding the adverse effects of the cardio-pulmonary bypass, but its efficacy in AMI has not been confirmed yet. The purpose of this study is to evaluate retrospectively early and mid-term results of OPCAB in patients with AMI according to transmurality and timing of operation. Material and Method: Data were collected in 126 AMI patients who underwent OPCAB between January 2002 and July 2005, Mean age of patients were 61.2 years. Male was 92 (73.0%) and female was 34 (27.2%). 106 patients (85.7%) had 3 vessel coronary artery disease or left main disease. Urgent or emergent operations were performed in 25 patients (19.8%). 72 patients (57.1%) had non-transmural myocardial infarction (group 1) and 52 patients (42.9%) had transmural myocardial infarction (group 2). The incidence of cardiogenic shock and insertion of intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP) was higher in group 2. The time between occurrence of AMI and operation was divided in 4 subgroups (<1 day, $1{\sim}3\;days,\;4{\sim}7\;days$, >8 days). OPCAB was performed a mean of $5.3{\pm}7.1$ days after AMI in total, which was $4.2{\pm}5.9$ days in group 1, and $6,6{\pm}8.3$ days in group 2. Result: Mean distal an-astomoses were 3.21 and postoperative IABP was inserted in 3 patients. There was 1 perioperative death in group 1 due to low cardiac output syndrome, but no perioperative new MI occurred in this study. There was no difference in postoperative major complication between two groups and according to the timing of operation. Mean follow-up time was 21.3 months ($4{\sim}42$ months). The 42 months actuarial survival rate was $94.9{\pm}2.4%$, which was $91.4{\pm}4.7%$ in group 1 and $98.0{\pm}2.0%$ in group 2 (p=0.26). The 42 months freedom rate from cardiac death was $97.6{\pm}1.4%$ which was $97.0{\pm}2.0%$ in group 1 and $98.0{\pm}2.0%$ in group 2 (p=0.74). The 42 months freedom rate from cardiac event was $95.4{\pm}2.0%$ which was $94.8{\pm}2.9%$ in group 1 and $95.9{\pm}2.9%$ in group 2 (p=0.89). Conclusion: OPCAB in AMI not only reduces morbidity but also favors hospital outcomes irrespective of timing of operation. The transmurality of myocardial infarction did not affect the surgical and midterm outcomes of OPCAB. Therefore, there may be no need to delay the surgical off-pump revascularization of the patients with AMI if surgical revascularization is indicated.