• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.111-132
• /
• 2014

Recently, there have been discussions about the necessity of consumer arbitration such as ADR. The debate has progressed, because this area of arbitration has expanded into the press and medical fields. However, there is not an act for regulating consumer arbitration in South Korea. Thus, this issue has been deliberated at UNCITRAL Working Group III. The core issue of this deliberation is the validity of consumer arbitration. Especially if a pre-dispute arbitration agreement is contracted online, it progresses by using standardized terms; therefore it is possible that the Standardized Terms Regulating Act judges the relevant terms. This thesis consists of the following: First, concepts and categories of arbitration agreements. These include arbitration agreement, pre-dispute arbitration agreement, and arbitration agreement through standardized terms. Second, the validity of the above agreements will be discussed. There are three positions concerning their validity: affirmative as de lege ferenda, negative, and restrictively negative. Similar discussions concerning German law and cases would be helpful to specify and compare the issue. When a consumer arbitration agreement is contracted through standardized terms, it is necessary that the required formality of the agreement has been satisfied, before the effect of the agreement may be regulated by the German Civil Code.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.31 no.4
• /
• pp.71-97
• /
• 2021

The meaning of the amendment to the Media Arbitration Act in our society is not limited to media companies. And it's not just a problem for a specific group. It expresses public value because it is an issue that can affect members of society as a whole and furthermore, it becomes a bill that can infringe or strengthen individual freedom guaranteed by the Constitution, but makes different arguments. Freedom of speech is not achieved in a day and should not be easily lost by someone. Although it is not a frequent problem, fatal threats arising from wrong media reports take away an individual's present and future. It is because of this problem that the responsibility is important. Freedom of speech and control are heading in different directions, but they are the same as the front and back of the coin. The freedom pursued is different, but it consists of one body. If freedom and responsibility of speech made up of one body criticize or ignore each other, the results are scattered into a distorted On the other hand, the flexion of responsibility without freedom serves as a speaker that conveys the ideology of some classes or represents the interests of a particular group. The fact that the media should act as the air of society means that it should represent the interests of the majority, make them aware of the rights of unfair or marginalized members, and be their strength.

• Korean journal of communication and information
• /
• v.76
• /
• pp.151-182
• /
• 2016

The right to be forgotten (RTBF) has been a population notion to address privacy issues associated with the digitalization of information and the dissemination of such information over the global digital network. In May 2014, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) laid down a landmark RTBF decision to grant individuals the right to be de-listed from search results. ECJ's RTBF decision sparked an increased interest in RTBF in South Korea. Academic and non-academic commentators have provided a mistaken or outstretched interpretation of RTBF in claiming that removal of news articles should be read into RTBF in Korean law. Moreover, the Press Arbitration Commission of Korea (PAC) has proposed revising the Press Arbitration Act (PAA) to allow the alleged victims of news reporting to request the deletion of news stories. This article examines the notion of RTBF from its origin to the latest development abroad and also critically explores Korean laws regulation freedom of expression to evaluate if Korea needs the proposed PAA revision.