• Korea journal of population studies
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.181-198
• /
• 1997

Going beyond the previous formulations of development theories, the present paper explores the effects other than political economy on quality of life in a rapidly developing country. The major analysis takes up the historical trend and nature of the developmental transformation that is partially a consequences of state structures and partially autonomous form it in South Korea. Also, it diagnoses developmental pathways for the future track by constructing a baseline model for state transition on the basis of power game between the state and civil society in the country. The results of the historical analysis show that civil society has been transformed in the course of confrontations and interactions between the state and nationalist social movement. The distinction between developmental(or bureaucratic authoritarian) and democratic state is presented to show that these are two qualitatively different aspects of state of state power, requiring separate analytical treatment. Furthermore, the state-centric approach which emphasizes the active role of the state at the sacrifice of societal fabric-constraining social conditions for quality of life - appears to be modified. On the contrary, the impact of civil society is transmitted both directly and indirectly via labor and ecological movement for quality of life, which is critical to the formation of the welfare state in the country. The prospect for sustainable development in Korea lies in providng and expanding quality of life in terms of the financial feasibility of the state through the public-private cooperation, and abstaining from drastic and radical commitment to welfare services as is the case with the European declines in welfare state, Further studies are needed to examine the interrelationships in different historical and cultural settings of developing counties to estimate a theory of quality of life and social justice.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.135-167
• /
• 2006

Air service agreements between EU Member States and third countries concluded by Sweden, Finland, Belgium, Luxembourg, Austria, the Netherlands, Denmark and the United Kingdom after the Second World War infringe EU law. They authorize the third countries to withdraw, suspend or limit the traffic rights of air carriers designated by the signatory States. According to the Court of Justice of the European Communities (CJEC), these agreements infringe EU law in two respects. On the one hand, the presence of nationality clauses infringes the right of European airlines to non-discriminatory market access to routes between all Member States and third countries. On the other hand, only the EU has the authority to sign up to this type of commitment where agreements affect the exercise of EU competence, i.e. involve an area covered by EU legislation. The Court held that since the third countries have the right to refuse a carrier, these agreements therefore constitute an obstacle to the freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services, as the opening of European skies to third countries' companies is not reciprocal for all EU airlines. In the conclusion, in order to reconstruct these public international air law, The new negotiations between EU member states and third countries, especially the US, must be designed to ensure an adequate set of principles, so that Member States, in their bilateral relations with third countries in the area of air service, should consider following three models. The 1st, to develop a new model of public international air law such as a new Bermuda III. The 2nd, to reconstruct new freedoms of the air, for example, the 7th, 8th, and 9th freedoms. The 3rd, to explore new approaching models, such as complex system theory explored in the recent social sciences, to make access world-wide global problems instead of bilateral problems between EU member states and United States. The example will show any lessons to air talks between European Union and ROK.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Traditional Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.36 no.1
• /
• pp.34-44
• /
• 2018

In the Ancient Mesopotamia, Egypt, Judas, Greece, and Rome, Phoenix dactylifera was planted in gardens or orchards to signify life, blessing, and victory. Branches of Phoenix dactylifera, likened to high and precious, were referred to one of the gifts to the king in the second century BC and have been used in the Feast of Tabernacles. And they were engraved on the walls of the temple and along with cherub. Besides, Phoenix dactylifera is compared with a righteous person in the Bible since it grows straight despite strong winds. And, it was used as a symbol of honesty, justice, and right. Churches call the week before Easter Palm Sunday since the crowd laid the leaves of date palm trees on the road and shouted "Hosanna" while waving the date palm branches when Jesus entered Jerusalem. Moreover, pilgrim in the Middle Ages was called 'Palmer' in English due to custom of returning with the leaves and branches of date palm trees as a memorial of the Holy Land pilgrimage. This study analyzes naming issue of Phoenix dactylifera through the old literature and 27 versions of the most influential Bibles in History of Bible Translation in Korea, China, and Japan. Phoenix dactylifera is translated into Chinese as '棕櫚(Trachycarpus fortunei)', a native tree of China. 棕櫚 is similar to Phoenix dactylifera, but its fruit and leaf are quite distinct. This being so, translating Phoenix dactylifera as 棕櫚 has a limit to convey symbolic meaning adequately. In the Japanese Bible, on the other hand, Phoenix dactylifera is translated as 'なつめやし(Natsumeyashi)' meant date palm tree. Most of Protestant Bible in Korea use 'Jongryeo' like Chinese Bible while translation in Korean Catholic Bible(2005) varies from one scripture to another: 'Yaja Namu (Palm Tree)' - 38 times, 'Jongryeo Namu' - 5 times, and 'Daechu Yaja Namu (Date Palm Tree)' - 3 times. Date Palm Tree, 'Jongryeo Tree', and Palm Tree don't grow in Korea. However, they had long been recognized as Haejo(海棗), Jongryeo(?櫚), and Yaja(椰子) respectively through China and Japan. Each of them called by a distinct name correspond with its own characteristic and used separately in Korean Classics as Jongryeo and Haejo were identified in ancient Chinese literatures. It seems that more confusion was raised since 'Palm' was translated as 'Jongryeo' in several books including "?藤和英大辭典 (1915)", "Modern 朝鮮外來語辭典(1938)", and "Latin-Korean Dictionary(1995)". However, the Latin term 'Palmae' is translated into English as either palm tree or date palm. The results of this study suggest that more accurate translation of Phoenix dactylifera in the Bible would be 'Daechu Yaja Namu (Date Palm Tree)' and using different name fit for its own characteristic would be more appropriate.

• Korea journal of population studies
• /
• v.10 no.1
• /
• pp.70-86
• /
• 1987

Going beyond the previous formulations of development theories, the present paper explores the effects other than political economy on quality of life in a rapidly developing country. The major analysis takes up the historical trend and nature of the developmental transformation that is partially a consequences of state structures and partially autonomous form it in South Korea. Also, it diagnoses developmental pathways for the future track by constructing a baseline model for state transition on the basis of power game between the state and civil society in the country. The results of the historical analysis show that civil society has been transformed in the course of confrontations and interactions between the state and nationalist social movement. The distinction between developmental(or bureaucratic authoritarian) and democratic state is presented to show that these are two qualitatively different aspects of state of state power, requiring separate analytical treatment. Furthermore, the state-centric approach which emphasizes the active role of the state at the sacrifice of societal fabric-constraining social conditions for quality of life - appears to be modified. On the contrary, the impact of civil society is transmitted both directly and indirectly via labor and ecological movement for quality of life, which is critical to the formation of the welfare state in the country. The prospect for sustainable development in Korea lies in providng and expanding quality of life in terms of the financial feasibility of the state through the public-private cooperation, and abstaining from drastic and radical commitment to welfare services as is the case with the European declines in welfare state, Further studies are needed to examine the interrelationships in different historical and cultural settings of developing counties to estimate a theory of quality of life and social justice.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.53
• /
• pp.553-591
• /
• 2017

This article discussed whether so-called 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' is in breach of public policy provided in Article 217(1)(3) of Civil Procedure Act and, if so, what the specific requirements could be. The summary of the conclusion is as follows. The 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' is against the municipal procedural public policy and then shall not be recognized. In this regard one more question comes up whether reviewing if 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' is in breach of the municipal procedural public policy is allowed in consideration of the principle of prohibition of $r{\acute{e}}vision$ au fond. Since the principle is applied entirely in the course of the above reviewing, it is allowed only when it does not breach the principle. The two instances that the reviewing is allowed are where the defendant was not able to produce evidences of fraud during foreign procedures and where the defendant's claim of fraud without evidences was rejected by the foreign court and then evidences of fraud were found after the foreign procedure was completed. On the other hand, the specific requirements for 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' to be against public policy are following four requirements based on principle of strict interpretation of public policy. (1) plaintiff's intention to fraud, (2) preventing the defendant from being involved in the procedure by fraud or cheating the foreign court using manipulated evidences, (3) the defendant could not present himself in the foreign court procedure due to the plaintiff's extraneous fraud or the foreign court decided wrongly due to intrinsic fraud, and (4) defendant's fundamental procedural rights were breached to the extent that recognizing the effect of foreign judgments was against justice defendant's fundamental procedural rights. These results differ from the Supreme Court 2004. 10. 28. ruling 2002da74213 in many aspects. Most of all, in my opinion there is no need to distinguish between intrinsic fraud and extraneous fraud and reviewing 'foreign judgments obtained by fraud' is not in conflict with the principle of prohibition of $r{\acute{e}}vision$ au fond but the both may coexist. In this regard I expect the variation of the Supreme Court's position and hope to contribute to academia and practitioners.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.44
• /
• pp.611-653
• /
• 2013

An whistle-blowing is recognition of acts of misconduct or corruption by individuals(laborers) or party which belongs to a certain organization and it refers to the act of informing to the senior organization or to the outside public agency to avoid jeopardies that could be potentially lead against benefit of the public. These whistle-blowings can be a Ansatz that improve corporation's transparency and accountability by prevention of enterprise's misconduct as well, it has been recognized as an important role for the establishment of corporate ethics, moreover, social justice. What to be treated primarily as labor law problem is arousing some controversies of the possibility that the public announcement could be whether a disciplinary punishment or not because it brings some mischievous effects for the honor and the reputation to the company which conducted the illegal actions and the action of the contrary to the social value. And futhermore, recently, the matter of compensational responsibility according to the arrangement conversion, bullying followed by the informant has been brought up. The fundamental standpoint of precedent related with the judgement of justification for the punishment as reason of the whistle-blowing ought to do the sincere duty for the labor contract which is the employees are supposed to consider the employer's profits. For that reason, if the emploee release the inside fact to the public and give any damages to employer's secret or confidence or honor, it will be a causing reasong of the disciplinary punishment, but in specific cases, the relevant and level of punishment limitation can be judged by the contents of public announcement and the truth, the purpose of the acts and details and the way of announcement. Precisely, on the assumption that there are necessity of the characteristic profit or the freedom of expression for the informant, with overall consideration whether or the basis part of the informant is true or there is a fair reason which make the informant believe is true or the purpose of informant has the public profit or the contents of the whistle-blowing are important for relevant organization or the means and the way was suitable, if the whistle-blowing are approved to be resonable, the organization are not permitted the reprimand or dismiss Futhermore, to find the solution for the issues of the disciplinary punishment and the treatment of all sorts of disadvantages, for the reason of whistle-blowing, since the protection law for public declarer which was enacted in last 2011 have the position as the general law, the purport of the equal law has to be considered sytematically and also the judicial precedent which is related to the justification of whistle-blowing are needed to be considered as well.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.137
• /
• pp.57-79
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this paper is to explain MacIntyre's critique of moral pluralism of modern society and reveal the limits of his critique of liberalism. It is a distinctive feature of the social and cultural order that we inhabit that disagreements over central moral issues are peculiarly unsettleable. Debates concerned with the value of human life such as those over abortion and euthanasia, or about distributive justice and property rights, or about war and peace degenerate into confrontations of assertion and counter-assertion because the protagonists of rival positions invoke incommensurable forms of moral assertion against each other. We usually call this situation 'modern moral pluralism' and concede as the natural outcome of the activities of human reason under free institution. But in After Virtue, MacIntyre vigorously criticizes modern moral pluralism. The main cause he took which brought about this state of affairs was the failure of 'the Enlightenment project'. According to MacIntyre, the Enlightenment project which has dominated philosophy for the past three hundred years promised a conception of rationality independent of historical and social context, and independent of any specific understanding of man's nature or purpose. But not only has that promise in fact been unfulfilled, the project is itself fundamentally flawed and the promise could never be fulfilled. In consequence, modern moral and political thought are in a state of disarray from which they can be rescued only if we revert to an Aristotelian paradigm, with its essential commitment, and construct an account of practical reason premised on that commitment. But one of the deepest difficulties with the argument of After Virtue is that the very extent of its critique of the modern world seems to cast doubt on the possibility of any realistic revival under the conditions of modernity of the Aristotelianism which MacIntyre advocates. Especially when we consider we are not only the characters found in our narratives but also we ourselves are the author of our own narratives. Moral pluralism is not seen as disaster but rather as the natural outcome of the activities of human reason under enduring free institutions.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.203-234
• /
• 2019

The concept of denied boarding is defined in Article 2(j) of Regulation 261/2004 thus: "denied boarding means a refusal to carry passengers on a flight, although they have presented themselves for boarding under the conditions laid down in Article 3(2), except where there are reasonable grounds to deny them boarding, such as reasons of health, safety or security, or inadequate travel documentation." So far as relevant to this case, to be entitled to compensation, if denied boarding, Article 3(2) provides a passenger must first come within the scope of the protection of the Regulation, which applies under the following conditions: "${\cdots}$.that passengers (a) have a confirmed reservation on the flight concerned and, except in the case of cancellation referred to in Article 5, present themselves for check-in, as stipulated and at the time indicated in advance and in writing (including by electronic means) by the air carrier, the tour operator or an authorised travel agent, or, if no time is indicated, not later than 45 minutes before the published departure time." This paper reviews the EU Cases such as Rodríguez Cachafeiro v. Iberia [2012] Case C-321/11; Finnair Oyj v. Timy Lassooy [2012] Case C-22/11; Caldwell v. easyJet Airline Co. Ltd. [2015] ScotSC 64. ECJ and Sheriff court of Scotland held that the concept of denied boarding, within the meaning of Articles 2(j) and 4 of Regulation No 261/2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation No 295/91, must be interpreted as relating not only to cases where boarding is denied because of overbooking but also to those where boarding is denied on other grounds, such as operational reasons. Also, ECJ ruled that Articles 2(j) and 4(3) must be interpreted as meaning that the occurrence of extraordinary circumstances resulting in an air carrier rescheduling flights after those circumstances arose cannot give grounds for denying boarding on those later flights or for exempting that carrier from its obligation, under Article 4(3) of that regulation, to compensate a passenger to whom it denies boarding on such a flight.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.3-38
• /
• 2019

In 1984, Congress enacted a new measure of administrative sanctions which is a civil money penalty program for violations of Aviation Act and its implementing regulations. This civil money penalty system has been in operations in lieu of suspending or revoking certificates issued by Korean government, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport. According to the rules of Aviation Business Act or Aviation Safety Act, where the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport should order an air carrier to suspend operation because of her violation under certain rules, in which case the suspension of operation is likely to cause serious inconvenience to consumers of air transport services or to harm public interest, the Minister of the department may impose an administrative monetary penalty in lieu of the suspension of operation. In this regard, airline related civil money penalties are somewhat different from those of fair trade, which is the origin of the money penalties system in Korea. Civil money penalties in the field of fair trade are imposed on executive duty violations that undermine the value of the market economy order, and focus on reimbursement of profits due to violations and compensation for unfair spending by consumers. However, in the aviation sector, breach of duty by a business operator does not simply cause the property loss of the public, but it has a direct impact on life or property of the public. In this respect, aviation penalties are more likely to be administrative sanctions or punitive measures than refunds of unfair benefits, compared to penalties in the field of fair trade. In general, civil money penalties have been highly preferred as administrative sanctions because they are subject to investigations by administrative experts and thus, efficiency can be ensured and execution is quicker than judicial procedures. Moreover, in Korea, because punitive civil damages cannot awarded by the courts, the imposition of civil money penalties is recognized as a means of realizing social justice by recognizing the legal feelings of the people. However, civil money penalties are administrative sanctions, and in terms of effectiveness, they are similar to criminal fines, which are a form of punishment. Inadequate legislation and operation of penalties imposition may cause damage to the value of Constitution. Under the above recognition, this paper has been described for the purpose of identifying the present status of the civil money penalties imposition system and operating status in the area of air transport under the laws and regulations in Korea. Especially, this paper was focused on exploring the problem and improvement direction of Korean system through the comparative study with foreign laws and regulations.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.267-290
• /
• 2018

This paper reviews and criticizes the EU Case of C-452/13, Germanwings GmbH v. Ronny Henning. Under this case, Ronny Henning later sued Lufthansa's budget carrier Germanwings after it refused to pay him 250 euros compensation for a delay he said totalled more than three hours. Germanwings, however, maintained his flight had arrived only two hours and 58 minutes behind schedule. In those circumstances, the following question to the European Court of Justice (ECJ) for a preliminary ruling: What time is relevant for the term time of arrival used in Articles 2, 5 and 7 of Regulation [No 261/2004]: (a) the time that the aircraft lands on the runway (touchdown); (b) the time that the aircraft reaches its parking position and the parking brakes are engaged or the chocks have been applied (in-block time); (c) the time that the aircraft door is opened; (d) a time defined by the parties in the context of party autonomy? ECJ says that the situation of passengers on a flight does not change substantially when their aircraft touches down on the runway at the destination airport, when that aircraft reaches its parking position and the parking brakes are engaged or when the chocks are applied, as the passengers continue to be subject, in the enclosed space in which they are sitting, to various constraints. Therefore, it is only when the passengers are permitted to leave the aircraft and the order is given to that effect to open the doors of the aircraft that the passengers may in principle resume their normal activities without being subject to those constraints. ECJ rules that it is apparent that Articles 2, 5 and 7 of Regulation No 261/2004 must be interpreted as meaning that the concept of 'arrival time', which is used to determine the length of the delay to which passengers on a flight have been subject, corresponds to the time at which at least one of the doors of the aircraft is opened, the assumption being that, at that moment, the passengers are permitted to leave the aircraft.