• 해양환경안전학회지
• /
• 제27권3호
• /
• pp.421-428
• /
• 2021

Identifying which international maritime legal instruments are mandatory or recommendatory is complicated task even for maritime regulatory bodies. Although International Maritime Organization (IMO) had tried to ease the complexity by adopting guidelines on uniform wordings for making reference to other instruments in IMO parent conventions, there has still been some confusion identifying the mandatory status of IMO instruments. The aim of this study was to map out a step-based guideline to resolve the complexity of the mandatory status of IMO instruments to the maximum extent possible. This study reviewed the history of IMO rule-making process to find the root cause of the problem, then analyzed the approaches of regulatory enforcement bodies to check the practices. In conclusion, readers are directed to find such information as to legal status of IMO instruments and an improvement is proposed to enhance the transparency of information sharing for maritime industry to make better informed decisions.

• 해양환경안전학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 해양환경안전학회 2017년도 추계학술발표회
• /
• pp.200-200
• /
• 2017

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권40호
• /
• pp.131-143
• /
• 2016

On 12 July 2016, China's maritime claim to most of the South China Sea (SCS) based on the so-called nine-dash line was rejected by the Arbitral Tribunal, constituted under Annex VII to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) concerning issues in the South China Sea including the legality of the so-called "nine-dashed line", the status of certain maritime features and their corresponding maritime entitlements, together with the lawfulness of certain actions by China which the Philppines, in a case brought in 2013, alleged were violations. As having the Tribunal determined that China's claim had no legal grounds in UNCLOS, thus undermining China's claims, and establishing that China has no exclusive legal rights to control the area roughly the size of India. There are some major implications from the Tribunal's ruling in the Arbitration award. These include implications on: how to delimit the maritime boundary in disputed waters, how to promote maritime confidence-building measures, how to safeguard maritime safety and security, and how to promote the rule of law in the SCS. Since its application of UNCLOS in East Asia, it has been obvious that the only way to resolve maritime disputes in the region is to build strong maritime cooperative partnerships under the auspices of the rule of law.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제16권2호
• /
• pp.213-238
• /
• 2006

Deferred payment letter of credit is the L/C that makes the issuing bank to pay a beneficiary at maturity stipulated in the credit. In this deferred payment letter of credit transaction, is it possible that a confirming or nominating bank payor negotiate before maturity? and the confirming or nominating bank have legal protection when paid or negotiated before maturity? These problems are raised in argument. By the way, Korea, Switzerland, Germany, and Italy are positive on the above question, but France, United Kingdom, and Singapore are negative. Therefore, when using deferred payment letter of credit, it is required to keep in mind that the understanding of maturity stipulated in the credit is different among countries, legal principles of each nations, and researchers. And other problems are raised also as follows; the application of Fraud Rule and principle of independence and abstraction as nature of credit, when to pay credit amount to beneficiary, and refusal of payment due to poor quality. Finally, it is required to use deferred payment letter of credit, after full understanding of deferred payment letter of credit pointed out in this paper.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제34권2호
• /
• pp.45-64
• /
• 2024

In international transactions, a demand guarantee is commonly used as a so-called independent bank guarantee to protect against the other party's default under, or breach of, contract). However, there is a risk that the independence and the documentary character of the demand guarantee may be abused by the beneficiary of the guarantee, who may fall into the temptation to demand or call for payment under the guarantee by preparing documents that appear to constitute a complying demand for payment, even though the demand has no conceivable basis. In Korea, through case law, a legal rule has been developed to prevent such abusive calls for payment. This paper examines how such rule that prohibits abuse of rights is applying in the context of counter-guarantees. To this end, this paper first considers the concepts of a demand guarantee and a counter-guarantee and the basic legal principles applicable thereto. And then this paper considers abusive calls under the guarantees, that exceptionally works as grounds for refusal of payment by guarantors and counter-guarantors, further looking at some situations in which the calls amount to be abusive under counter-guarantees in particular.

• 한국항공운항학회지
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.52-61
• /
• 2009

In Korea, there is great lack in jet lease agreements compared to many other countries. Due to such scarcity in numbers of jet lease agreements, problems have never truly surfaced and legal foundation dealing with such issues have not yet been formulated. However, as the globalization is making the world smaller and smaller, the demand for jets will grow. As the Korean aviation industry is expanding tremendously, although very preliminary at this time, the interest and actual execution on private jet lease agreements will grow. The prediction of increase in the private jet ownership is causing the lease industry to be nervous and may require particular preparatory foundation works. Particularly, legal analysis and detailed review maybe necessary to set a precedent with will serve as the grounded rule in the future. It is notable that Vietnam, a country which is believed have a less developed aviation industry than Korea, had already established a specialized jet leasing company, VALC in 2007. Also, when leasing an airplane from a foreign financial institution, it is possible to obtain a government issued guarantee. Therefore, it is urgent for Korea to prepare the legal foundation for the future demands in aviation leasing, as well as private jet leases which in turn would promote national wealth and further develop the financial industry.

• 정보처리학회논문지D
• /
• 제16D권2호
• /
• pp.265-272
• /
• 2009

디지털 장치들의 활발한 사용은 디지털 증거들을 양산하지만, 이들 증거들이 법정에서 범죄사실을 증명하는 증거로 채택되기에는 많은 어려움이 있다. 따라서 이 논문에서는 디지털 포렌식 온톨로지를 이용한 디지털 증거들의 증거능력에 대한 검증 방법을 제안한다. 디지털 증거들의 증거능력을 검증하기 위하여 경찰청에서 정의한 표준 디지털 포렌식 처리절차에 따라 디지털 포렌식 온톨로지를 확장하고, 디지털 포렌식 온톨로지에서 정의한 각 클래스들 간의 property 관계를 설정하였다. 또한 각 클래스간의 property 제한 규칙을 정의하여 활용한다. 이 논문에서 제안된 검증방법과 온톨로지는 디지털 증거 수집을 위한 계획을 수립하거나, 디지털 포렌식의 교육 등에 활용할 수 있다.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• 제25권4호
• /
• pp.545-555
• /
• 2003

It is widely known that compare to many other countries, the U.S.A. has a strong framework for efficient implementation of mitigation policy to protect wetlands. As indicated in many strong mitigation initiatives, mitigation policy primary requires avoidance rule for wetland damage and if a developer inevitability damages wetlands, the development should be minimize, and as a last resort, the policy impose legal duty that a developer should compensate wetland corresponding to the damaged wetlands. However, the legal system fur Korea's mitigation system does not provide any legal duty for the compensatory mitigation, although the possibility of creation of tidal flat is casually expressed in several Korean legal systems. Therefore, without any strong and enforceable legal system, Korean mitigation system cannot efficiently protect Korea's vast and productive wetlands. To introduce mitigation policy similar to the U.S.A. in Korea, we suggest that there (a) should be a strongly policy which regulate legal duty for the compensatory mitigation, (b) should be an improve management system for actively corresponding to special knowledge relating to environment, and lastly, (c) should be a system which consider a class action introduced in environmental regime for a long term protection of tidal wetlands for future generation.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권4호
• /
• pp.97-122
• /
• 2013

Vietnam has become an attractive destination for foreign investors, but confidence in the country's legal system to resolve commercial disputes remains low. Reasons include the lack of an independent judiciary, the lack of published court decisions, and a tendency to criminalize civil disputes, among others. As such, arbitration has become a preferred alternative to litigation. On June 17, 2010, the National Assembly of Vietnam passed a new act on commercial arbitration replacing the July 1, 2003 ordinance on commercial arbitration. The new act will take effect on January 1, 2011, and it is widely expected by the Vietnamese legal profession and lawmakers will create a favorable legal framework for the expansion of the arbitration service market in Vietnam. The new act is inspired by the UNCITRAL Model Arbitration Law of 1985 as are most new arbitration laws throughout the world. As opposed to the 2003 ordinance, the 2010 Act allows parties to request interim relief from the arbitrators. Also the new act eliminates the mandate that arbitrators be Vietnamese. The law has addressed the ordinance's shortcomings and reflects international standards. Commercial arbitration law is an important milestone in the improvement process of the laws on commercial arbitration in Vietnam. However, it is still too soon to affirm anything definitely because there remain many obstacles to the activation of arbitration. Rule of law and business cultural factors are important. The leading arbitral institution, VIAC, which is attached to the Vietnam Chamber of Commerce and Industry, is expected to play an important role for boosting the competitiveness of Vietnamese arbitration as an avenue to dispute settlement.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제27권2호
• /
• pp.37-57
• /
• 2017

On 9 March 2017, a Tribunal constituted under the ICSID Convention issued its ruling in the case of Ansung Housing v. People's Republic of China, dismissing with prejudice all claims made by the Claimant, Ansung Housing Co., Ltd., in its Request for Arbitration, pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5). Ansung Housing v. PRC has drawn attention since it is the first case where an investor with Korean nationality initiated an ICSID arbitration on the basis of the Korea-China Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) as amended in 2007 between the Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China. The Tribunal finds that its ruling is about a lack of jurisdiction of the ICSID and of its own competence as well as regarding manifest lack of legal merit due to a lack of temporal jurisdiction, since a Respondent's Rule 41(5) objection is concerned with the three-year limitation period in Article 9(7) of the Korea-China BIT. The Tribunal held that, under Article 9(7) of the Korea-China BIT, the limitation period begins with an investor's first knowledge of the fact that it has incurred loss or damage, not with the date on which it gains knowledge of the quantum of that loss or damage. Finally, the Tribunal held that Ansung submitted its dispute to ICSID and made its claim for purposes of Article 9(3) and (7) of the BIT after more than three years had elapsed from the date on which Ansung first acquired knowledge of loss or damage and that the claim is time-barred and, as such, is manifestly without legal merit. It remains to be seen whether the aggrieved Claimant initiates annulment proceedings before an ad hoc committee under the ICSID Convention. It is quite interesting to see whether the decisions by the Tribunal should be reversed on the basis of the Claimant's arguments as to the start date as well as the end date of the limitation period under the Korea-China BIT.