• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제26권7호
• /
• pp.93-108
• /
• 2022

Purpose - This paper examines the admissibility of restitution as the legal consequence where a contract is frustrated under the Law of Reform (Frustrated Contracts) Act 1943 in comparison with Korean Civil Code (KCC). In order to provide practical guidelines and advice regarding choice of and application of law for contracting parties in international trade, the paper comparatively evaluates requirements and the scope of restitution under the Act 1943 and KCC. Design/methodology - This paper executes a comparative study to analyze whether the parties may claim restitution of money paid or non-money benefit obtained before or after the time of discharge under English law and KCC. To achieve the purpose, it focuses on the identifying characteristics of each statute, thereby providing guidelines to overcome difficulties in legal application and interpretation as to restitution as the consequence of frustration. Findings - Under English law, the benefit may be restituted according to Art 1943 or the common law rule, mistake of fact or law. Under the KCC, restitution is considered based on the principle of the obligation to recover the original obtained regardless of the time when the benefit is conferred. Whilst Act 1943 does not require careful analysis of the grounds of restitution, requirements to justify restitution according to the principle of unjust enrichment, mistake of fact or law, and the KCC should be met. Meanwhile, the KCC may provide more opportunities to award restitution because it does not require the burden of proof related to the defendant's good faith, unlike the principle of unjust enrichment. Originality/value - Where the contract is frustrated by the effect of COVID-19, one legal issue is a consequence of frustration. Therefore, this paper analyzes requirements and the scope of restitution under English law as compared with the KCC in a timely manner. It provides contracting parties with practical guidelines and advice to reduce unpredictability when they choose the governing law in a contract.

• 한국건설관리학회논문집
• /
• 제21권4호
• /
• pp.82-89
• /
• 2020

국가계약법 시행령 제64조 물가변동 계약금액 조정과 관련한 법령의 충족요건은 계약체결일로 부터 물가변동율이 5% 이상 이었으며, 조정방법도 중앙관서의 장 또는 계약담당공무원과 계약상대자가 협의하는 것 이었으나, 2005. 9. 8. 대통령령 제19035호 계약체결일에서 입찰일로, 충족요건도 5%이상에서 3%이상으로 변경되었고 계약금액 조정방법도 계약시에 계약상대자가 원하는 조정방법으로 결정하는 것으로 변경되었다. 이런 충족요건의 완화와 계약상대자의 권한강화 개정은 계약상대자에게 부당하게 이익 또는 불이익을 주지않고 공공건설 수급사업자에게까지 적용되어 원활한 목적 달성에 지장이 초래되는 것을 막기 위한 것이다. 상기와 같이 기준이 완화되고 권리를 보장받게 되었음에도 기존의 물가변동 조정 계약예규를 적용하다 보면 정부 제도의 당초 취지와는 달리, 한국은행 물가경제통계 분류방식과 공공건설공사에서 적용되는 계약예규 분류기준 불일치 때문에 공사종류별 물가변동 조정금액이 과다, 과소 산정 적용되고 있는 경우를 볼 수 있다. 이에 사례들을 통하여 문제점을 분석하고 개선방안을 통하여 적정 공사비 조정이 이루어 질수 있도록 하는 것에 이 연구의 목적이 있다.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제22권3호
• /
• pp.315-346
• /
• 2012

The legal relationship between patient and physician is legally equal relationship. But, in times past, patients be compelled to sign an unequal contract, substantially. Because of the imbalance between supply and demand in the health care market. Today, the law of supply and demand in the health care market is running well. And as the cognition of citizens' rights grows, the relationship between patient and physician can also get a lot of changes. Patients have the right to know the information about medical care, and to decide whether or not to get treatment including invasions against their own bodies. In other words, Doctors have an obligation to explain to their patients. If doctors did not provide patients sufficient explanation or information, it violates the right of patients. This is a tort, or a breach of contract. To improve the remedy for violation of patient's right, patient is able to be protected by status as consumer. If patient is a kind of consumer in terms of medical consumption, he/she as consumer can enjoy supplementally the consumer's right. The patient as a consumer can exercise now a consumer's right as a constitutional right. In addition, with respect to consumer's rights, Framework Act on Consumers was enacted. This Act is based on constitutional provisions of Article 124 and the Act can be seen as a law that embodies consumer right because the provision of the constitutional law delegates specific contents. In the health care field, patients need to win recognition the statue of the consumer to hold the sovereignty of the consumer. In particular, if patients are consumers, they may be able to make good use of the quickly and efficiently collective dispute resolution and association lawsuit to rescue their damage, the Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) of Framework Act on Consumers.

• 한국콘텐츠학회논문지
• /
• 제18권8호
• /
• pp.483-493
• /
• 2018

예술인의 직업적 지위와 권리보호를 위한 법 제도인 노동관계법, 사회보험법, 예술인복지법의 개선을 통하여 근로자성 인정, 고용보험법 가입특례, 국민건강보험법과 국민연금법 적용특례 등이 인정되어야 한다. 이를 위해 노동관계법에 대한 법원의 해석이나 입법에 의해 근로자 범위를 확대해야 하고, 현재 제외되어 있는 예술인의 고용보험법 가입 특례와 국민건강보험법 적용 특례 등 사회보험의 지원범위도 넓혀나가야 한다. 보험료 전액 본인부담에 임의가입 방식인 예술인 산재보험제도도 보험료 지원을 통해 제도의 실효성을 가져가야 한다. 예술인복지법 역시 예술인에 대한 법적 보호를 강화하는 등의 내용으로 개정이 필요하다. 또한 예술인복지사업에 대한 재원의 확보도 중요하다. 그리고 표준계약서를 의무화하고 예술인의 경력증명시스템을 구축하여 예술 활동기준을 적용해 복지수혜가 필요한 예술인이 누락되지 않도록 해야 한다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권1호
• /
• pp.87-111
• /
• 2020

Smart contracts are implemented by blockchain technology, which stores the terms of the contracts of both parties on the blockchain. In the event of an international dispute over smart contracts and blockchains, no special solution has been proposed, such as the enactment of the International Unification Act. The blockchain platform which operates smart contracts is decentralized and operates through distributed nodes around the world without central servers, making it difficult to establish jurisdiction and governing laws. As an alternative to traditional dispute-solving methods, a new mediation model-smart arbitration-is being attempted. The arbitration process is likely to be a preferred means of resolving disputes over smart contracts in practice. There are many problems, such as the fairness of the arbitration center on the selection and judgment of arbitrators, the question of securing reliability, the question of the validity of the arbitration agreement, and how much the court can be involved in the case. Preparations at the national level, such as fostering blockchains and smart contract experts, and overhauling the legal system, are needed.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제77권
• /
• pp.69-89
• /
• 2018

The United States of America is one of the most favoring countries in which mandatory pre-arbitration clauses in the form of adhesion contract have been widely recognized and supported by courts and the Federal Arbitration Act. However, after the financial crisis in 2008 and the National Arbitration Forum scandal in 2009, in enacting the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ('Dodd-Frank Act'), Section 1028(a) of the Act requires the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to provide Congress with a report on "the use of agreements providing for arbitration of any future dispute between covered persons and consumers". Section 1028(b) also grants the CFPB the authority to "prohibit or impose conditions or limitations on the use of an agreement between a covered person and a consumer for a consumer financial product or service providing for arbitration of any future dispute between the parties, if the Bureau finds that such a prohibition or imposition of conditions or limitations is in the public interest and for the protection of consumers." Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB issued a report entitled "2015 Arbitration Study: Report to Congress 2015 (Report)" in March 2015. This paper examines some major legal issues of the Report and makes a few recommendations for Korean financial institutions which entered into the U.S. financial market or has a plan to do so in the near future.

• 시큐리티연구
• /
• 제55호
• /
• pp.143-167
• /
• 2018

경비업법상 경비원은 단순노무 종사자가 아닌 부족한 경찰력을 보완하고 국가중요시설, 산업시설, 공동주택 등의 경비를 전문으로 하는 보안관련 서비스 종사자이다. 그럼에도 불구하고 보안관련 서비스직인 경비업법상 경비원과 단순 노무직인 파견법상 경비원을 혼동 내지 혼용함으로써 경비원의 업무범위에 관한 논란이 끊이지 않고 있다. 경비업법상 경비원의 경우에는 엄격한 결격사유를 규정하고 있으며, 경비원 신임교육 및 직무교육을 받게 하고 있으며, 경비업자가 경비원을 배치하거나 배치를 폐지한 경우에는 관할 경찰관서장에게 신고하게 하는 등 경비원의 자격 등에 대하여 엄격한 제한을 규정하고 있다. 이는 경비업법상 경비원을 파견법상 경비원과 구분하여 전문 서비스직으로서 경비원의 직종을 인정하고자 함에 있다고 할 것이다. 따라서 경비업법상 경비원에 대하여는 경비업무 외 업무를 시켜서는 안 된다. 경비업무 외 업무를 시키고자 할 경우에는 경비업법상 도급계약을 체결할 것이 아니라 파견법상 경비원을 사용하던지 또는 고용계약에 의한 경비원을 고용하여 자체경비를 하여야 할 것이다. 이렇게 경비업법상 경비원을 전문 보안관련 서비스직으로 인정할 때 궁극적으로 경비산업 전반이 발전할 수 있을 것이다.

• 국제학술발표논문집
• /
• The 6th International Conference on Construction Engineering and Project Management
• /
• pp.704-705
• /
• 2015

Recent research has been ongoing for modular buildings in the country, and interest increases. However, in accordance with legal restrictions in the country with regard to Project Delivery system of Modular Building, the activation of modular buildings industry is obstructed. In Korea, in accordance with national contract law, the construction contract is apply to the project delivery system of modular buildings, and in accordance with Framework Act on the Construction Industry, The project delivery system of modular buildings has to be a separate order. The definition of separate order in contract as defined in the law is that the electric work and Communication work and digestion facility work has to be separate each contract in order to be ensured professionalism. In accordance with law, the project delivery system of modular buildings is that the contract for construction is concluded with the Owner and the Construction Contractor and the contract for goods is concluded with the construction Contractor and modular manufacturer. Due to these project delivery system, the domestic factory production rate when making a modular unit is significantly reduced compared to the rate of factory production abroad and the domestic factory production rate is estimated to 10-20%. Due to the factory production rate is also low, despite what can be done at the factory the workload in construction field increases. According to the workload in field increases, the effect of the schedule reduction can be reduced. It resolved to form a consortium with a modular manufacturer and construction companies or the contract is concluded with Owner, modular manufacturer and construction companies in each. In this paper, we propose a specific project delivery system for modular building to solve the problem of the low factory production rate and the problem of schedule reduction. Through this paper, due to the variety of project delivery system on modular buildings is expected to contribute to the activation of modular buildings.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제45권3호
• /
• pp.133-146
• /
• 2020

In the UK's the insurance law 2015, a remedy for breach of warranty in marine insurance was introduced. Also, if the insured proves that breach of warranty in marine insurance does not affect damages, the insurer pays the insurance money to the insured. The UK's marine insurance law has served as the governing law that has been the standard for the marine insurance industry for a long time. Korea and China were heavily influenced by the UK maritime insurance law. Therefore, this study analyzed the cases of breach of warranty in marine insurance in Korea and China. Through this, the insurer avoid the insurance contract for an accident that occurred after the breach of warranty. this result will be different under the new revised insurance law system. With the revision to The Insurance Act 2015, one of the biggest change in the insurance system is that it is possible to remedy of the violations of warranty. However, such a revision of the law requires considerable attention as it also changes the interpretation and judgment of the courts. Accordingly, a practical response of the insurance industry is required. It is necessary to prepare for possible disputes in practice.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제22권2호
• /
• pp.81-109
• /
• 2021

본 논문에서는 민법전에 의료계약에 관한 규정을 신설하기 위한 논의의 과정에서 의료관련 법률의 진료거부금지 규정과 의료계약에서 계약자유의 원칙의 관계를 검토하였다. 그 내용은 다음과 같다. 의료법의 진료거부금지 규정이 의료계약 체약의 자유를 제한하는 것은 아니다. 환자의 요청에 따른 진료개시와 진료개시 후 의학적 판단에 기초한 의료내용의 결정과 진료비에 대한 협의 하에 체결되는 의료계약의 성립은 구별된다. 반면 진료거부금지 규정으로 의료계약 해지의 자유는 제한된다. 의료계약은 전문가인 의료인과 자신의 생명·신체에 대한 처분을 전문가에게 맡긴 환자의 신뢰에 기초한 것이기 때문에 신뢰가 깨지면 계약을 해지할 수 있을 것이다. 그러나 계약의 해지로 환자의 생명·신체에 불이익을 주어서는 안 되기 때문에, 의료계약의 해지에는 일정한 제한을 두어야 할 것이다. 의료계약의 체약을 강제하고 정당한 사유가 있는 때에만 계약을 해지할 수 있도록 하는 것이 현재 의료법의 태도이다. 민법전의 의료계약에 관한 규정에서는 의료계약 해지의 자유를 인정하되, 일정한 경우에 계약의 해지를 제한하는 방향을 제시하였다. 계약의 해지를 위한 정당한 사유가 인정되고, 환자가 다른 의료인으로부터 진료를 받을 수 없는 등 불리한 시기가 아닌 경우에 계약의 해지를 인정한다. 의료법의 진료거부금지의무 위반에 대한 처벌규정을 삭제하고, 계약법의 문제로 옮겨와야 할 것이다. 진료를 거부한 행위 자체에 대해서는 국민건강보험법의 요양급여거절의무에 따른 행정제재로 규율하여야 할 것이다.