• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제29권3호
• /
• pp.39-52
• /
• 2019

There are various factors to consider when parties to an international agreement draft a dispute resolution clause in their written contract. These factors can be classified into two categories. The first category is about the parties and the nature of the contract, such as the parties' places of business and whether the contract contains a simple transaction or has a complicated nature. The second category is about the applicable rules of the parties' places of business or performance such as the private international law, service of process rules, and enforcement of court judgment and arbitration award rules. When parties to an international contract agree to a litigation, they normally choose a forum court and a governing law. In selecting a forum court and a governing law, the parties must consider private international law, service of process rules, and enforcement of judgement rules of candidate forums. In case the parties agree to an arbitration, they have to choose between institutional arbitration and ad hoc arbitration. For ad hoc arbitration, parties still need to further agree on which arbitration rules to use, and in which place the arbitration shall take place. Mediation involves a similar kind of decision as with arbitration. Traditionally, national courts of the parties' places of business have been used as litigation forums in dispute resolution clauses but, recently, arbitration is being increasingly employed as an alternative dispute resolution method in international contracts. Moreover, there have been international efforts to utilize mediation as a dispute resolution method in international commercial issues. Rather than simply taking a dispute resolution clause provided in a sample written contract, parties to an international contract must carefully consider various relevant factors in order to insert a dispute resolution clause which will work well for a particular contract.

• 한국정보과학회논문지:컴퓨팅의 실제 및 레터
• /
• 제13권6호
• /
• pp.427-431
• /
• 2007

본 논문에서는 어절별 중의성 해소 규칙과 trigram 통계 정보를 이용하는 혼합형 한국어 품사 태깅 시스템에 대하여 기술한다. 어절별 중의성 해소 규칙은 중의성을 가지는 어절들 각각에 대해 정의된 중의성 해소 규칙으로, 현재 중의성을 가지는 어절의 50%에 대해 작성되어 있다. 본 논문의 태깅 시스템은 먼저 보조용언, 숙어, 관용적 표현 등에 해당하는 공통규칙을 적용하고, 그 후에 어절별 중의성 해소 규칙을 적용한다. 마지막으로 중의성이 해소되지 않은 어절은 각 어절을 중심으로 하는 trigram 통계 정보를 이용하여 중의성을 해소한다. 실험 결과는 본 논문에서 제안하는 어절별 중의성 해소 규칙과 trigram 통계 정보를 혼합하여 중의성을 해소 시키는 방법이 높은 정확률과 넓은 처리 범위를 가지고 있다는 것을 보여준다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제35권
• /
• pp.125-144
• /
• 2007

The objective of this study is to find out whether Korean companies which are doing a lot of commercial transactions with Indian companies can consider appointing ICA as a trustworthy institution and using ICA arbitration rules as a governing arbitration rule, when a dispute between Korean companies and Indian companies occurs. Up to now, in the case of dispute with Indian companies, Korean companies are hesitant to utilize ICA as well as ICA arbitration rules as a alternative dispute resolution, owing to lack of understanding on its rules. But, it is obvious that Korean companies which come to have better knowledge on ICA and its rules may consider more positively using ICA as well as ICA arbitration rules as a dispute resolution rather than using other arbitration institutions like ICC and KCAB etc. in the case of disputes with Indian companies because ICA arbitration rules are very objective and similar to other arbitration rules like ICC rules as well as KCAB(Korean Commercial Arbitration Board) international arbitration rules which are frequently being used by Korean companies and also have other several advantages like cheaper cost of arbitration and fast track arbitration procedures. In conclusion, ICA and its rules can also be recommended as a public-trustworthy arbitration option if Korean companies want to resolve some dispute cases with Indian companies.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.353-375
• /
• 1998

This study is focused on the rules for resolving documentary credits disputes. First, International Chamber of Commerce published Documentary Credit Dispute Expertise Rules on October 1, 1997. The DOCDEX Rules are the International Chamber of Commerce(ICC) response to a clear call from the international banking community for a rapid, cost effective, expert-based dispute resolution mechanism for documentary credit practice, including bank-to-bank reimbursement issues. Next, The International Center for Letter of Credit Arbitration was established in September 1996. The Center was founded as a result of an initiative from within the letter of credit community and has been co-sponsored by the United States Council on International Banking(USCIB) and the Institute of International Banking Law and Practice Inc. In September, ICLOCA adopted its "Rules of Arbitration for Letter of Credit Disputes." Therefore, parties to letter of credit disputes should choose a appropriate dispute resolution mechanism under the circumstances in the future.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제25권1호
• /
• pp.25-46
• /
• 2015

Cross-border consumer disputes are on the increase as cross-border trade between consumers and businesses continues to grow. Cross-border consumer disputes are difficult to solve, because there are different languages, laws and institutions between the parties. These consumer disputes can be solved more easily by Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) in comparison with utilizing court processes. ODR is a branch of dispute resolution which uses technology to facilitate the resolution of disputes between parties. It primarily involves negotiation, mediation or arbitration, or a combination of all three. In this respect it is often seen as being the online equivalent of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). On 18 June 2013, the new legislation on Alternative Dispute Resolution and Online Dispute Resolution has been published - the "Directive on Consumer ADR and Regulation on Consumer ODR". The new legislation on ADR and ODR will allow consumers and traders to solve their disputes without going to court, in a quick, low-cost and simple way. The United Nations working group for online dispute resolution of cross-border electronic commerce transactions (UNCITRAL Working Group III) has been underway since 2010 to continue its work on procedural rules for ODR.

• 한국지능시스템학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국퍼지및지능시스템학회 1995년도 추계학술대회 95 KFIS Workshop Realization of Human Friendly System Based on Soft Computiong Techniques
• /
• pp.124-140
• /
• 1995

The merit of fuzzy rule based systems stems from their capability of encoding qualitative knowledge of experts into quantitative rules. Recent advancement in automatic tuning or self-organization of fuzzy rules from experimental data further enhances their power, allowing the integration of the top-down encoding of knowledge with the bottom-up learning of rules. In this paper, methods of self-organizing fuzzy rules and of performing defuzzification and inference is presented based on a multi-resolution radial basis function network. The network learns an arbitrary input-output mapping from sample distribution as the union of hyper-ellipsoidal clusters of various locations, sizes and shapes. The hyper-ellipsoidal clusters, representing fuzzy rules, are self-organized based of global competition in such a way as to ensute uniform mapping errors. The cooperative interpolation among the multiple clusters associated with a mapping allows the network to perform a bidirectional many-to-many mapping, representing a particular from of defuzzification. Finally, an inference engine is constructed for the network to search for an optimal chain of rules or situation transitions under the constraint of transition feasibilities imposed by the learned mapping. Applications of the proposed network to skill acquisition are shown.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제24권3호
• /
• pp.33-46
• /
• 2014

Amiable composition is a means of dispute resolution based on the arbitrator's authority to base his decision on equity. Although this method has been used frequently in the last decades of the 20th Century, the number of the published awards by amiable compositeur arbitrators is getting lower and lower. The reason(s) for unpopularity of amiable composition should be sought in its very nature, in its relationships with other institutions such as arbitration in law, equity, ex aequo et bono arbitration, other means of dispute resolution and in its role in the development of the rules specific to international commerce. A brief look at the history of law shows that the concept of equity comes to the scene every time that the rigidity of the rules of law challenges the justice. This has been the case in the 20th Century with respect to international commercial law which was deprived of specific rules. The role of amiable composition has been to contribute to the development of the rules specific to international commerce. The progressive codification of such rules in the last decades is also owed to amiable composition, which has accomplished its mission in the evolution of these rules.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제64권
• /
• pp.65-97
• /
• 2014

Arbitration is the dispute methods for speedy and economic resolutions in international commercial areas. In maritime disputes cases in East Asia, Korea and Japan are the regional benefits to cover and deal with the maritime cases on arbitration. And Korea and Japan are the competitive maritime industry for heavy shipbuilding industry, cargo carrier, processing and transhipment service on ports, and ship financial services in national competitive areas. Japan is the Tokyo maritime arbitration commission(TOMAC) as an uniquely capable of dealing with arbitrations involving problems arising in the sea field. TOMAC provides amended its arbitration rules 2014 aiming at matching with the maritime disputes circumstances with three maritime arbitration rules as ordinary rules, simplified rules and the rules of small claims arbitration procedure. KCAB however, as the unique commercial arbitration board in Korea is dealing on all of the commercial disputes on only the international commercial arbitration rules in 2011. Though KCAB is dealt with maritime dispute cases on international arbitration rules in Korea, it is small and simple compared with TOMAC in Japan. Maritime disputes are highly complicated and embroiled with multi-parties contract and subcontracts arising under contracts relating to bills of lading, charter parties, sale and purchase of ships, shipbuilding, ship financing and so forth. This paper is to provides a discussion and comparison on recently arbitration rules focus on the maritime aspects on Korea and Japan. We need to consider to make an independent and special institute and maritime arbitration rules including the multiparty consolidation and med-arb provisions for handling the disputes and resolution of maritime conflict cases in Korea.

• 지능정보연구
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.251-267
• /
• 2003

객체지향 데이터 베이스에서는 지능 정보시스템에서 요구하는 것을 만족하기 위하여 보다 지능적인 질의 처리 기법이 필요하다. 본 논문에서는 추론적 기법을 사용하여, 객체지향 데이터베이스에서의 지능적인 질의 처리하는 방법에 대하여 논의한다. 논문에서 제시하는 방법을 사용하여, 객체지향 데이터베이스에서 주어진 질의에 대한 답을 추상적으로 표현하는 지능적인 답을 얻을 수 있다. 본 논문에서 제안하는 지능적인 질의 처리 방법은 규칙 표현, 규칙 재편성, 전 분석, 분석의 네 단계로 구성된다. 규칙 표현 단계에서는 객체지향 데이터베이스 스키마를 사용하여 추론 규칙을 생성한다. 규칙 재편성 단계에서는 규칙에서 순환을 제거한다. 전 분석 단계에서는 유일한 내포적 문자를 얻기 위하여 규칙변환이 이루어진다. 분석 단계에서는 SLD-분석을 사용하여 내포적 답을 구한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제64권
• /
• pp.99-128
• /
• 2014

Last year, Seoul International Dispute Resolution Center(SIDRC) was set up to facilitate and promote international arbitration in Korea. This study was focused on the revision of arbitration rules such as ICC, SIAC, HKIAC and JCAA. As a leading arbitration institution in the world, ICC has tried continuously to provide more efficient service to their client by adopting emergency arbitrator(EA) & multi party arbitration. Other three institutions also introduced almost same mechanism to compete each other. These two new system is very innovative in international arbitration. First of all, EA was designed to provide interim measure service to preserve or protect parties' right before the constitution of arbitral tribunal. Arbitration institutions and arbitral tribunals should be careful to decide these requests are legitimate or not because too hasty approval on joinder or consolidation without full consideration such as parties' intention or argument may issue another serious problem - setting aside an award rendered after joined or consolidated.