• Journal of Internet Computing and Services
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.77-86
• /
• 2022

The Republic of Korea is a country in which coastal surveillance is an imperative national task as it is surrounded by seas on three sides under the confrontation between South and North Korea. However, due to Defense Reform 2.0, the number of R/D (Radar) operating personnel has decreased, and the period of service has also been shortened. Moreover, there is always a possibility that a human error will occur. This paper presents specific guidelines for developing an AI learning model for the intelligent coastal surveillance system. We present a three-step strategy to realize the guidelines. The first stage is a typical stage of building an AI learning model, including data collection, storage, filtering, purification, and data transformation. In the second stage, R/D signal analysis is first performed. Subsequently, AI learning model development for classifying real and false images, coastal area analysis, and vulnerable area/time analysis are performed. In the final stage, validation, visualization, and demonstration of the AI learning model are performed. Through this research, the first achievement of making the existing weapon system intelligent by applying the application of AI technology was achieved.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.129
• /
• pp.111-140
• /
• 2014

In this paper, the main subjects with which I deal are as follows: (1) Is Distancing Philosophy from the real ruling power a way of practical-philosophical resistance, based on social reformation as a axiological directivity of Kim Tae-Gil's ethical thought, though it is negative type of resistance? Or is it a sort of transformed value-free opportunist behavior which allows antidemocratic ruling group to coerce the people into submission, assuming an uncompromising stand seemingly? (2) Is Kim's defense argument on the opening of the course of National Ethics and the all-out activation of National Ethics education under Park's Yushin Regime derived from his own philosophical belief? Or is it brought out from the external conditions and circumstances surrounding Kim Tae-Gil which forces him to participate in the national undertaking for the settlement of the course of National Ethics in the university? The 'provisional' answers about the two subjects are as follows: (1) Kim's Distancing Philosophy is a type of practical philosophical revolt against the dictatorship power under Yushin Regime, though it is negative form of resistance. We can accept this philosophical elucidation above all by confirming the fact that the reform of reality is the main ethical trait running through his entire ethical thought system. However distancing philosophy disclose the crucial limits to allow itself to boil to the philosophical practice compromising with real ruling power eventually, though it is intended upon its own social ethical directivity and conviction. (2) The primary factor which affects Kim to propose such an advocation argument on the course of National Ethics and the education of National Ethics is the external conditions and circumstances surrounding him, especially the power-relation between he and ruling group and intimate human relation between he and his superior philosophers who carries out the role of a ideologue for the Yushin Regime, rather than his own philosophical belief. But no matter what primary factor, Kim's action to make a advocating argument to support the course and the education of National Ethics is to blame, on that account that he cannot adequately his social responsibility and role given to him as a reformist moral philosopher who will pursue the realization of righteous democratic society. Along with that, It is not too enough to criticize him sharply for such defending action. The reason is that his supporting stance for National Ethics education is brought out, by not adhering closely to the philosophical way of distancing from the dictatorial power devoid of political legitimacy and moral justification.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.3
• /
• pp.155-206
• /
• 2023

When a person with diminished mental capacity refuses necessary medical care, normative judgments about when paternalistic intervention can be justified come into question. A typical example is involuntary hospitalization for people with mental disabilities, traditionally governed by mental health law. However, Korean civil law reform in 2011 introduced a new form of involuntary hospitalization through guardianship legislation, leading to a dualized system to involuntary hospitalization. Consequently, a conflict has arisen between the 'best interest and surrogate decision-making' paradigm of civil law and the 'social defense and preventive detention' paradigm of mental health law. Many countries have criticized this dualized system as not only inefficient but also unfair. Moreover, the requirement for the presence of 'mental illness' for involuntary hospitalization under mental health law has faced criticism for unfairly discriminating against people with mental disabilities. In response, attempts have been made to integrate guardianship legislation and mental health law based on mental capacity. This study examines the legislative process and framework of the Mental Capacity Act (Northern Ireland) 2016, which reorganized the mental health care system by fusing guardianship legislation with mental health law based on mental capacity. By analyzing the case of Northern Ireland, which has grappled with conflicts between guardianship legislation and mental health law since the 1990s and recently proposed mental capacity as a single, non-discriminatory standard, we aimed to offer insights for the Korean guardianship and mental health systems.