• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제36권
• /
• pp.87-109
• /
• 2007

This Comment explores the ICSID case of CMS Gas Transmission Company v. Argentine Republic, awarded on May 12, 2005. The Part II of this Comment first describes the relevant facts of the case including the some background for readers' understanding and the Part III summaries the claimant's requests and the decisions rendered by the Arbitral Tribunal in the Award. At Part IV, the Comment addresses the issue of determinating laws applicable to the merits of dispute in case that the parties of the case have not chosen a governing law, and at Part V, takes a close look into three main issues of (i) the indirect expropriation of the investment, (ii) the breach of fair and equitable treatment and (iii) the protections under umbrella clauses. In this CMS case, we see first that while the Tribunal affirmed that any indirect expropriation can occur from incidental interference depriving the foreign investor of the use or reasonable-to-be-expected economic benefit even if not necessarily to the obvious benefit of the host State, the Tribunal denied the occurrence of indirect expropriation in this case by holding that the Government of Argentina has not breached the standard of protection laid down in the Treaty. Secondly, however, regarding the issue of fair and equitable treatment, we see that the Tribunal, finding Argentina's breach of obligations, affirmed that the foreign investor can expect the host State to act in a consistent manner, free from ambiguity and totally transparently in its relations with the foreign investor, which can give the foreign investor certain degree of foreseeability. Thirdly and finally, we see that, on base of the effect of the umbrella clause, the Tribunal recognized the obligation of the host State undertaken not to freeze the tariff regime or subject it to price controls and not to alter the basic rules governing contracts between the foreign investor and the host State without the first's written consent. However, the protection under the umbrella clause is available only when there is a specific breach of rights and obligations under BIT or a violation of contract rights protected under BIT.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제24권1호
• /
• pp.25-44
• /
• 2014

Conflict between transnational environmental issues and foreign investment in capital-importing states can be commonly found. Actually, several investor-state dispute arbitration cases like Bilcon v. Canada, S.D. Myers v. Canada, and Metalclad v. Mexico concerned environmental matters. States are worried about their measures for securing the environment might be deemed to go against international investment agreements and foreign investors also are anxious because of excessive regulations. Against this backdrop, stakeholders attempt to strike a balance between securing foreign investment and preserving the environment. This article argues that the investment chapter of the Korea-US FTA tries to solve environment-investment collision in investor-state disputes. Before analyzing the provisions of the investment chapter most relevant to environmental issues, this article points out the most typical types of environmental clauses included in international investment agreements. The investment chapter of the Korea-US FTA has provisions which effectively prevent measures from becoming useless when those measures are legitimate measures relevant to environmental matters. This does not mean that the Korea-US FTA completely solves the conflict between environmental issues and the protection of foreign investment, but still it paves the way for a prudent solution which would hash out this thorny problem.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제28권2호
• /
• pp.201-216
• /
• 2018

After the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, the European Union's Common Commercial Policy now belongs to the exclusive competence area of the EU, including the foreign direct investment (FDI) policy. Regarding the bilateral investment protection treaties (BITs) between the EU Member States, the European Commission is of the view that such BITs should be discarded. On March 6, 2018, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) held in the Achmea BV v. Slovakia case that a BIT between the EU Member States, as well as arbitral awards based on that BIT, is not subject to request for preliminary rulings under the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), and thus they are not compatible with the EU law. However, the judgment did not silence the controversy. Instead, many people questioned the legal reasoning and the legitimacy of judgment, and therefore the problem is still ongoing.

• 지식경영연구
• /
• 제24권3호
• /
• pp.73-94
• /
• 2023

가상자산 시장의 가파른 성장과 함께, 가상자산 상장 및 거래 절차에 대한 정부 차원의 규제가 가해질 전망이나, 구체적인 규제 방안은 부재한 상황이다. 향후 안정적인 제도권 편입을 위해서는 시장 생태계 조성과 투자자 보호를 위한 더욱 구체적인 규제 방안이 필요하다. 따라서 본고에서는 국내 5대 가상자산거래소의 자체 가이드라인과 한국거래소의 예비상장심사기준(2022)을 비교하였다. 본고에서는 IEO, IPO, ICO의 개념을 정의하고 IEO의 이해상충 문제를 명시하였다. 이후, 규제 방안을 제시하기 위해 실제 상장 폐지된 가상자산의 사례를 분석하고 문제점을 유형별로 분류하였다. 또한 유가증권 시장 상장 심사 가이드라인을 형식적 심사 요건과 질적 심사 요건으로 분류하고, 질적 심사 요건은 기업의 계속성, 경영 투명성, 경영의 안정성, 주식회사 속성 및 투자자 보호 총 네 가지 기준으로 분류하였다. 또한, 사례 분석을 통해 얻은 구조적인 문제를 보완할 수 있는 방안을 제시하였다. 이 방안은 지배 구조 정기 공시, 유통량 정기 공시, 독립 감사 기관 신설 총 세 가지다. 본고는 기존 연구에서 한발 더 나아가 실제 상장 폐지 사례를 분석하고 그 문제점을 유형별로 분류하여 개선안을 제시하였다는 점, 유가증권 시장과 가상자산 시장의 유사성을 감안하여 제도권의 프레임워크를 차용하여 보완책을 제시하였다는 점에서 그 의의가 있다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.33-52
• /
• 2014

기후변화문제는 이미 글로벌 이슈로 부상한 지 오래이지만, 기후변화문제를 각국의 정책으로 이식시키는데 필요한 국제투자법상의 적합한 기준들은 아직 마련되어 있지 않은 실정이다. 최근 ICSID중재에 회부된 Vattenfall v. Germany 사례는 독일 정부의 원전폐쇄 조치에 대한 기후변화 관련 국제투자분쟁의 대표적 사례라고 할 수 있다. 2005년 발효된 교토의정서는 환경오염의 주범인 온실가스를 감소시키는 방안으로 공동이행체제와 청정개발시스템 등의 유연한 메카니즘들을 제안하였다. 교토의정서의 이러한 교토메카니즘들은 이행규칙상, 사적 영역의 투자자들이 각국이 이행하는 교토메카니즘의 규제아래 놓일 수도 있게 함으로써 잠재적으로 투자분쟁의 위험을 지니고 있다고 할 수 있다. 각 국가가 교토메카니즘을 잘 이행하기 위한 배출기준의 더욱 엄격한 규제 등을 한다면 온실가스 감축이라는 글로벌 명제와 상관없이, 정부의 기후변화 조치들조차 수용의 금지라고 하는 국제투자중재의 투자자 보호 원칙들의 잣대 하에 놓일 가능성을 배제할 수 없는 것이다. 수 용의 문제에 있어 이제까지 대부분의 국제투자중재 판정에서 내려진 '침해의 결과(effect-based)'만을 기준으로 적용한다면, 각국 정부들의 배출기준 조정에 대해 투자자들이 자신들의 투자를 유치국 정부가 수용했다고 볼 수 있는 가능성이 생긴다. 투자중재 회부의 두려움으로 인한 각국 정부의 '규제적 위축(regulatory chill)'의 문제도 세계 각국이 기후 변화정책을 강화하는 것을 방해하는 역할을 할 수 있다. 투자 계약상 투자자를 보호하기 위한 정부조치의 '정지조항(stablization clause)'도 투자 유치국의 기후변화 이행과 새로운 입법에 된서리 효과를 가지고 올 것이다. 그리고 현재까지의 투자중재 판정부의 공정하고 공평한 대우 기준(FET)의 적용을 본다면, 교토메카니즘 이전에 탄소 집약적 산업들이 저탄소 운영체제로 가기 위해 투자유치국에 진입할 때, 투자유치국이 적절한 이행을 하는데에 상당한 부담을 줄 수도 있다. 그러므로 Methanex 사건 판정부에서처럼, 수용에 있어서 침해결과만을 볼 것이 아니라, 정부의 규제결정이 의도적으로 외국인 투자자의 투자를 침해할 목적이 아니고 비차별적이며 공공적인 목적이라면 수용의 범주에 포함시키지 않도록 하는 것이 바람직할 것이다. 또한 환경법상의 지속가능한 발전의 원칙을 투자조약이나 투자계약에 포함하도록 하는 것을 고려해 볼 수 있다. 덧붙여 이후부터 정부가 투자자-국가 중재 회부 가능성이라는 부담을 벗어나서 환경규제를 이행하기 위해서는 투자자-국가 중재이외의 다른 적절한 분쟁해결 조항을 입안하여 합의하는 것도 고려해 볼만 하다.

• 유통과학연구
• /
• 제12권10호
• /
• pp.5-9
• /
• 2014

Purpose - This paper aims to critically examine capital market developments in India before and after liberalization. Research design, data, and methodology - The paper examines the Indian capital market from its inception to the latest developments related to both primary and secondary markets, and also discusses recent initiatives of capital markets to enhance the expected level of services to the investor community. It also sheds light on the regulatory framework for investor protection. Results - The study further highlights the future roadmap for the radical development of the Indian capital market. The paper identifies the various initial obstacles and intricacies that affect the smooth functioning of the Indian capital markets. Hence, the paper articulates that these concerns should be addressed by the regulatory authorities and at the policy level at the earliest for further strengthening the capital markets in the interests of the economy in general and retail investors in particular. Conclusion - This is a topic of utmost contemporary importance to worldwide national economies, and calls for novel methods and techniques in dealing effectively with the menace facing capital markets.

• 스마트미디어저널
• /
• 제11권5호
• /
• pp.63-74
• /
• 2022

기업공개(IPO)는 투자자 보호를 위한 법적 테두리가 마련되어 있으며, 다양한 정량적 평가 요소가 존재하기 때문에 객관적인 분석이 가능하며 다양한 연구가 수행되어 왔다. 또한, 크라우드펀딩 역시 투자자 보호를 위한 법적 제도와 무분별한 펀딩을 방지하기 위한 여러 장치가 마련되어 있다. 반면에 최근 각광받는 블록체인 기반의 암호화폐 백서(ICO)는 투자자를 보호할 법적 수단과 기준이 모호하며 ICO를 객관적으로 평가하기 위한 정량적 평가 방법이 미흡한 상황이다. 따라서 본 연구는 ICO의 사기 여부를 탐지하기 위해 온라인상 공개된 ICO 백서를 수집하고 텍스트 임베딩 기법인 BERT에 기반한 ICO 사기 예측을 수행하였고 기존의 Random Forest 머신러닝 기법과 비교하여 정량적 방법으로 사기 탐지가 가능함을 보였다. 최종적으로 본 연구는 비정형 데이터에 기반하여 ICO의 사기 여부를 판단할 수 있는 정량적 접근 방법론의 활용 가능성을 제시함으로써 정량적 방법에 기초한 ICO 사기 탐지 연구에 기여할 수 있을 것으로 기대된다

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제23권7호
• /
• pp.83-95
• /
• 2019

Purpose - This study analyzed the effect of the Trump Government's protectionist trade policies on foreign ownership. Specifically, this study empirically analyzes the hypothesis that foreign ownership will decrease after the Trump Government rather than before the Trump Government. Design/methodology - The hypothesis of this study is based on the expectation that US protection trade policy will negatively affect the profitability of Korean companies. The dependent variable in this study is the foreign ownership ratio, and the independent variable is a dummy variable representing before and after the Trump Government. Multiple regression analysis was performed, including the control variables suggested in previous studies related to foreign ownership. Findings - As a result, foreign ownership increased after the Trump Government rather than before the Trump Government. This study further analyzes whether the main variables affecting foreign investor's decision-making are differences before and after Trump Government. The export ratio, profitability and dividends did not differ before and after Trump Government. However, the level of information asymmetry decreased after the Trump Government than before the Trump Government. This suggests that US protection trade policies do not adversely affect the profitability of Korean companies. However, Korean firms are improving their information environment because US protectionist trade policies can lower profitability and negatively impact capital raising. In this regard, the foreign ownership ratio seems to differ before and after the Trump Government. Originality/value - This study contributes in that it presents data that US protectionist policies can affect Korean corporate governance. This study has implications from the short-term analysis of US protection trade policy.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권3호
• /
• pp.127-147
• /
• 2013

Korea is, after China, the Asian country with the largest number of concluded investment treaties. One of the protections that Korean investment treaties frequently afford to foreign investors and their investment is the so-called "umbrella clause," which requires the host state of the investment to observe the commitments that it has undertaken toward the foreign investor or its investment. This is a potentially very powerful protection. Umbrella clauses, however, have proven to be amongst the most controversial provisions in investment treaties, giving rise to diverging interpretations by tribunals and commentators that are still not reconciled today.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.109-131
• /
• 2010

Investment Agreement is to be a part of FTA, as negotiating together both trade and investment. For example, it has a separate chapter about investment in KORUS FTA contract and is more detailed and inclusive than BIT contents which are traditional investment provisions. It is called to the investment norm of FT A. The investment agreement lures a foreign investment by providing the environment which is stable to the foreign investors. Hence, it plans in goal for the economic development of the home country. In international investment, the arbitration award cases are coming out to be divided into two parts applying MFN provisions in investor protective principles and dispute resolution process; the tendency of broad interpretation and the tendency of limited interpretation. In the case of RosInvest Co UK Ltd v. the Russian Federation awarded in 2007, the arbitration tribunal interprets that the application scope of MFN provisions contain the more lucrative dispute provision than other BITs without limitations in entity right of the investor. This judgment is the same view as arbitration tribunal position of Maffezini case. The arbitration tribunal of Plama case has kept out an assertion magnifying the arbitration tribunal's jurisdiction. That is, for applying more inclusive investor-nation resolution method from different treaty, tribunal mentioned that MFN provision had to see clearly a point of applying the investor-nation dispute resolution method. Dispute resolution process providing inclusive MFN provision has both the tendency of broad interpretation and the tendency of limited interpretation. It needs ceaselessly to do the monitoring about cases of arbitration award. In conclusion, the point where MFN provisions are applied conclusively is recognized, but it is still controversial whether or not to magnify the jurisdiction of arbitration tribunal applying MFN provisions. Therefore, it does not exist clear principle in the theory or in the award eases about the application scope for entity protection provision of MFN. Hence, The Korean government of Korea and local autonomous entities needs to keep their eyes on the trend of the international arbitration award cases in relation to the investment dispute for the future. Also, Korean government or local self-governing group must consider MFN provisions when they make a contract of international investment treaty such as writing concretely the application of MFN provisions from KORUS FTA.