• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.14
• /
• pp.485-516
• /
• 2007

Jeju Special Self-Government Province adopted an autonomous police system for the first time since 60 years in Korean police. The purpose of autonomous police system is to offer a police service to be suitable in regional conditions. But Jeju autonomous police system for nearly one year after adoption is criticized to be established on the ground of political reason but not local decentralization. Actually Jeju autonomous police has not a clear cut jurisdiction and operation scope because of the jurisdiction duplication between national and autonomous police. The original task is confined on environment and sightseeing so on given to administration police for local self-government. So criminal investigation authority on general crimes is not to Jeuju autonomous police on account of special judicial police. First, it is the structural rationalization of Jeju autonomous police system. It speaks that Jeju provincial police bureau and police station have to be as national police institution, on the other hand, patrol district station and police box have to be as autonomous police institution. Of course, functional division has to be followed. National police performs managing all the assembly and demonstration by the management law on assembly and demonstration including the suppression against any large scale demonstration and disturbance, also the investigation on serious crimes just as international crimes and broaden area crimes including all the felony. Together national police performs the duty concerned to all the foreign affairs and national securities in along with the investigation on traffic accidents. On the other hand, autonomous police performs the function for citizen's life safety as crime prevention and the enforcement on the violation against police operation law, together the traffic management and the regulation on traffic violations. and the investigation on minor crime as simple violence or petty larceny including the management on local big events. Second, the budgetary of autonomous police is rationalized by the share of budgeting between Korean government and Jeju special self-government province. Third, urgent arrest authority on general crime and the rights of claims for the summary trial on minor crimes are given to autonomous police. Of course, this problem is resolved naturally in case of giving the investigation rights to autonomous police on minor crimes.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.12
• /
• pp.377-401
• /
• 1999

This study is focused on the privity of the contract of carriage of goods by sea, so to speak, privity between B/L holder and carrier by transfer of bill of lading, privity by attornment to delivery order and conflict between bills of lading and charterparty terms. Under a CIF contract, possession of the bill of lading is equivalent to possession of the goods, and delivery of the bill of lading to the buyer or to a third party may be effective to pass the property in the goods to such person. The bill of lading is a document of title enabling the holder to obtain credit from banks before the arrival of the goods, for the transfer of the bill of lading can operate as a pledge of the goods themselves. In addition, it is by virtue of the bill of lading that the buyer or his assignee can obtain redress against the carrier for any breach of its terms and of the contract of carriage that it evidences. In other words the bill of lading creates a privity between its holder and the carrier as if the contract was made between them. The use of delivery orders in overseas sales is commen where bulk cargoes are split into more parcels than there are bills of lading, and this practice gives rise to considerable difficulties. For example, where the holder of a bill of lading transferred one of the delivery orders to the buyer who presented it to the carrier and paid the freight of the goods to which the order related, it was held that there was a contract between the buyer and the carrier under which the carrier could be made liable in repect of damage to the goods. The contract was on the same terms as that evidenced by, or contained in, the bill of lading, which was expressly incorporated by reference in the delivery order. If the transferee of the delivery order presents it and claims the goods, he may also be taken to have offered to enter into an implied contract incorporating some of the terms of the contract of carriage ; and he will, on the carrier's acceptance of that offer, not only acquire rights, but also incur liabilities under that contract. Where the terms of the charterparties conflict with those of the bills of lading, it is interpreted as below. First, goods may be shipped in a ship chartered by the shipper directly from the shipowner. In that case any bill of lading issued by the shipowner operates, as between shipowner and charterer, as a mere receipt. But if the bill of lading has been indorsed to a third party, between that third party and carrier, the bill of lading will normally be the contract of carriage. Secondly, goods may be shipped by a seller on a ship chartered by the buyer for taking delivery of the goods under the contract of sale. If the seller takes a bill of lading in his own name and to his own order, the terms of that bill of lading would govern the contractual relations between seller and carrier. Thirdly, a ship may be chartered by her owner to a charterer and then subchartered by the chaterer to a shipper, to whom a bill of lading may later be issued by the shipowner. In such a case, the bill of lading is regarded as evidencing a contract of carriage between the shipowner and cargo-owners.

• Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.81-88
• /
• 2010

Purpose: This study was conducted to study the attitude of Korean lawyers toward withdrawal of life sustaining treatment, and compare and analyze different types of their attitudes. Methods: Research design of this project was Q methodology approach. The study population was 24 lawyers, aged from 32 to 69 years. Q sample to investigate the attitude of the lawyers toward withdrawal of life sustaining treatment included 34 statements obtained from literatures, TV debate, and depth interviews of 5 lawyers among the lawyers included. After listening to the purpose and method of the study, the 24 lawyers agreed to fill out a survey asking sociodemographic information, and the information was distributed in 9 scale Q-sample. Results: The collected data were processed through QUANL PC program and sorted into 5 types as follows: The first type was 'Choosing to withdraw life sustaining treatment', the second 'Withholding life sustaining treatment' regardless of the cost, the third is neutral type that claims that humans have the right to decide the death and life, and demands the proper legalization to protect such rights, the fourth type agrees to withdrawal of life sustaining treatment, nevertheless, admits that one has a rigt to withhold one's own life treatment, categorized as self contradiction type. The fifth type believed that 'Life and death are providential' with the faith, therefore, such authority to decide life and death belongs to God, but not human beings. Conclusion: In conclusion, the lawyer's attitudes toward withdrawal of life sustaining treatment were grouped into five different types as follows: 'Choosing to withdraw life sustaining treatment', 'Withholding life sustaining treatment', 'Demanding legalization', 'Self contradiction type', and 'Life and death are providential'.

• Ocean and Polar Research
• /
• v.36 no.3
• /
• pp.255-276
• /
• 2014

The dispute between China and Japan regarding $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$ is believed to be quite similar to the controversy surrounding Dokdo in terms of historical and post-war processes except for the point that the phenomena of occupation is different with regard to Dokdo. China's claim to $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$ is based on historical title and continuous use while the basis of Japan's claim is summarized as preoccupancy of ownerless land. Even though Japan acknowledges that China discovered $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$, Japan claims that the act to establish sovereignty over the island from the standpoint of International Law was not taken by China. However, at that time, effective occupation was not an essential prerequisite for the acquisition of a territory. That is to say, from a legal perspective, the legal right for an area could be established based on the discovery of the land, and so it is thought that Japan is applying the current criteria of International Law in a manner that is inappropriate. When we review the post-war process, the San Francisco Peace Treaty does not directly mention $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$. But based on the said treaty, we can note that Japan gave up all rights for the southern area that is north of the boundary line that equates to latitude $29^{\circ}$ and that includes the Ryuku Islands and $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$. Of course, the provisions for the territory in the San Francisco Peace Treaty and its disposal are not the final factor for the judgment regarding dominium of $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$. However, it seems clear that Japan's attitude and interpretation regarding the issues of $Di\grave{a}oy\acute{u}t\acute{a}i$, the Kuril Islands and Dokdo is problematic.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Safety
• /
• v.34 no.1
• /
• pp.115-121
• /
• 2019

Background: Due to the diversification and advancement of research, researchers have become to deal with a variety of chemical and biological harmful materials in the laboratories of universities and research institutes and the risk has increased as well. Therefore, it is necessary to strengthen the social safety net for laboratory accidents by strengthening the compensation to the level comparable to that of Korean Workers' Compensation & Welfare Service, when the researchers become physically disabled by laboratory accidents. The purpose of this study is to secure researchers' health rights and to create a research environment where researchers can work with confidence by strengthening the compensation to the level comparable to that of Korean Workers' Compensation & Welfare Service. Method: We analyzed the laboratory accidents by year, injury type, severity of accident and disability grade with the 6 year data from 2011 to 2016, provided by Laboratory Safety Insurance. Based on the analysis result, we predicted the financial impact on Laboratory Safety Insurance if we introduce a compensation annuity by disability grade which is similar to Injury-Disease Compensation Annuity of Korean Workers' Compensation & Welfare Service. Result :As of 2011, the insured number of Laboratory Safety Insurance was approximately 700,000. The Average premium per insured was KRW 3,339 and there were 158 claims. Total claim amount was KRW 130 million, whereas the premium was about KRW 2.3 billion. The loss ratio was very low at 5.75%. If we introduce a compensation annuity by disability grade similar to Injury-Disease Compensation Annuity of Korean Workers' Compensation & Welfare Service, the expected benefit amount for 1 case of disability grade 1 would be KRW 1.6 billion, assuming 2% of interest rate. Given current premium, the loss ratio, the ratio of premium income to claim payment, is expected 41.4% in 2017 and 151.6% in 2026. The increased loss ratio due to the introduce of the compensation annuity by disability grade is estimated to be 11.0% in 2017 and 40.4% in 2026. Conclusion: Currently, laboratories can purchase insurance companies' laboratory safety insurance that meets the standards prescribed by Act on the Establishment of Safe Laboratory Environment. However, if a compensation annuity is introduced, it would be difficult for insurance companies to operate the laboratory safety insurance due to financial losses from a large-scale accident. Therefore, it is desirable that one or designated entities operate laboratory safety insurance. We think that it is more desirable for laboratory safety insurance to be operated by a public entity rather than private entities.

• Land and Housing Review
• /
• v.5 no.1
• /
• pp.53-56
• /
• 2014

Hong Kong, a well-known metropolis characterized by skyscrapers on both sides of the Victoria Harbour, consists mainly of 3 parts, namely the Hong Kong Island, the Kowloon peninsula and the New Territories (N.T.) which is the land area north of Kowloon plus a number of outlying islands. Located in the N.T. are all the new towns, market towns; and in the plains and valleys lie scattered village houses of not more than 3 storeys within the confines of well-defined village. These village houses are governed by a rural housing policy that could be traced back to the very beginning of the former British administration in the N.T. By the Convention of Peking of 1898, the N.T., comprising the massive land area north of Kowloon up to Shenzhen River and 235 islands, was leased to Britain by China for 99 years from 1st July 1898. Soon after occupation, the colonial government conducted a survey of this uncharted territory from 1899 to 1903, and set up a land court to facilitate all land registration work and to resolve disputed claims. By 1905, the Block Crown Leases with Schedule of Lessees and details of the lots, each with a copy of the lot index plan (Demarcation Plan) were executed. Based on the above, Crown rent rolls were prepared for record and rent collection purposes. All grants of land thereafter are known as New Grant lots. After completion and execution of the Block Crown Lease in 1905, N.T. villagers had to purchase village house lots by means of Restricted Village Auctions; and Building Licences were issued to convert private agricultural land for building purposes but gradually replaced by Land Exchanges (i.e. to surrender agricultural land for the re-grant of building land) from the early 1960's until introduction of the current Small House Policy in October 1972. It was not until the current New Territories Small House Policy came into effect in December 1972 that the Land Authority can make direct grant of government land or approve the conversion of self-owned agricultural land to allow indigenous villagers to build houses within the village environs under concessionary terms. Such houses are currently restricted to 700 square feet in area and three storeys with a maximum height of 27 feet. An indigenous villager is a male descendent of a villager who was the resident of a recognized village already existing in 1898. Each villager is only allowed one concessionary grant in his lifetime. Upon return of Hong Kong to the People's Republic of China on July 1st, 1997, the traditional rights of indigenous villagers are protected under Article 40 of the Basic Law (a mini-constitution of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region). Also all N.T. leases have been extended for 50 years up to 2047. Owing to the escalating demand and spiral landed property prices in recent years, abuse of the N.T. Small House Policy has been reported in some areas and is a concern in some quarters. The Hong Kong Institute of Land Administration attempts to study the history that leads to the current rural housing policy in the New Territories with particular emphasis on the small house policy, hoping that some light can be shed on the "way forward" for such a controversial policy.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.27 no.2
• /
• pp.143-166
• /
• 2012

This paper deals in depth with airline over-booking practices and legal questions therefrom in the light of public interests. Chapter I as an introduction gives clear ideas of what are the over-booking, fact-revealing current state of denied boarding and nature of the problems inherent but veiled in those practices. In Chapter II, it is reviewed whether legal instruments for DBC(Denied Boarding Compensation) are adequately equipped for airline passengers in R. O. K. Upon the results of the review that international law to which Korea is a party, domestic law and administrative preparedness for the DBC are either null or virtually ineffective, the Chapter by contrast illustrates how well the U. S. and the E. U. safeguard civil rights of their passengers from such an 'institutionalized fraud' as the over-booking. In Chapter III on which a main emphasis lies, it is examined whether the over-booking practice constitutes a criminal offense: Fraud. In section 1, the author identifies actus reus and mens rea required for fraud then compares those with every aspect of the over-booking. In conjunction with the structural element analysis, he reviews the Supreme Court's precedents that lead the section into a partial conclusion that the act of over-booking judicially constitutes a crime of fraud. Despite the fulfillment of drawing up an intended answer, the author furthers the topic in section 2 by arguing a dominant view from Korean academia taking opposite stance to the Supreme Court. The commentators assert, "To consummate a crime of fraud, there must be property damage of the victim." For this notion correlates with a debate on legally protected interest in criminalization of fraud, the section 2 shows an argument over 'Rechtgut' matters specific to fraud. The view claims that the Rechtgut comes down rather to 'right to property' than 'transactional integrity' or 'fair and equitable principles'. However, the section concludes that the later values shall be deemed as 'freedom in economic decision-making' which are the benefit and protection of the penal law about fraud. Section 3 demonstrates the self-contradiction of the view as it is proved by a conceptual analysis that the infringement on freedom in economic decision-making boils down to the 'property damage'. Such a notion is better grounded in section 4 by foreign court decisions and legislation in its favour. Therefore, this paper concludes that the airline's act of over-booking is very likely to constitute fraud in both theory and practice.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.18
• /
• pp.9-39
• /
• 2003

The rule of the Warsaw Convention of 1929 are well known and still being all over the world. The Warsaw Convention is undoubtedly the most widely accepted private international air law treaty with some 140 countries. In the international legal system for air transportation, the Warsaw Convention has played a major role for more than half century, and has been revised many times in consideration of the rapid developments of air high technology, changes of social and economic circumstances, need for the protection of passengers. Some amendments became effective, but others are still not effective. As a result, the whole international legal system for air transportation is at past so complicated and tangled. However, the 'Warsaw system' consists of the Warsaw Convention of 1929 the Guadalajara Convention of 1961, a supplementary convention, and the following six protocols: (1) the Hague Protocol of 1955, (2) the Guatemala Protocol of 1971, (3) the Montreal Additional Protocols, No.1, (4) the Montreal Additional Protocol No.2, (5) the Montreal Additional Protocol No.3, and (6) the Montreal Additional Protocol No.4. of 1975. As a fundamental principle of the air carrier's liability in the international convention and protocols, for instance in the Warsaw Convention and the Hague Protocol, the principle of limited liability and a presumed fault system has been adopted. Subsequently, the Montreal Inter-carrier Agreement of 1966, the Guatemala City Protocol, the Montreal Additional Protocol No.3, and the Montreal Additional Protocol No. 4 of 1975 maintained the limited liability, but substituted the presumed liability system by an absolute liability, that is, strict liability system. The Warsaw System, which sets relatively low compensation limits for victims of aircraft accidents and regulates the limited liability for death and injury of air passengers, had become increasingly outdated. Japanese Airlines and Inter-carrier Agreement of International Air Transport Association in 1995 has been adopted the unlimited liability of air carrier in international flight. The IATA Inter-Carrier Agreement, in which airlines in international air transportation agree to waive the limit of damages, was long and hard in coming, but it was remarkable achievement given the political and economic realities of the world. IATA deserves enormous credit for bringing it about. The Warsaw System is controversial and questionable. In order to find rational solution to disputes between nations which adopted differing liability systems in international air transportation, we need to reform the liability of air carriers the 'Warsaw system' and fundamentally, to unify the liability system among the nations. The International Civil Aviation Organization(ICAO) will therefore reinforce its efforts to further promote a legal environment that adequately reflects the public interest and the needs of the parties involved. The ICAO Study Group met in April, 1998, together with the Drafting Committee. The time between the "Special Group on the Modernization and Consolidation of the 'Warsaw system'(SGMW)" and the Diplomatic Conference must be actively utilized to arrange for profound studies of the outstanding issues and for wide international consultations with a view to narrowing the scope of differences and preparing for a global international consensus. From 11 to 28 May 1999 the ICAO Headquarters at Montreal hosted a Diplomatic Conference convened to consider, with a view to adoption, a draft Convention intended to modernize and to integrate replace the instruments of the Warsaw system. The Council of ICAO convened this Conference under the Procedure for the Adoption of International Conventions. Some 525 participants from 121 Contracting States of ICAO attended, one non-contracting State, 11 observer delegations from international organizations, a total of 544 registered participants took part in the historic three-week conference which began on 10 May. The Conference was a success since it adopted a new Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air. The 1999 Montreal Convention, created and signed by representatives of 52 countries at an international conference convened by ICAO at Montreal on May 28, 1999, came into effect on November 4, 2003. Representatives of 30 countries have now formally ratified the Convention under their respective national procedures and ratification of the United States, which was the 30th country to ratify, took place on September 5, 2003. Under Article 53.6 of the Montreal Convention, it enters into force on the 60th day following the deposit of the 30th instrument of ratification or acceptation. The United States' ratification was deposited with ICAO on September 5, 2003. The ICAO have succeeded in modernizing and consolidating a 70-year old system of international instruments of private international law into one legal instrument that will provide, for years to come, an adequate level of compensation for those involved in international aircraft accidents. An international diplomatic conference on air law by ICAO of 1999 succeeded in adopting a new regime for air carrier liability, replacing the Warsaw Convention and five other related legal instruments with a single convention that provided for unlimited liability in relation to passengers. Victims of international air accidents and their families will be better protected and compensated under the new Montreal Convention, which modernizes and consolidates a seventy-five year old system of international instruments of private international law into one legal instrument. A major feature of the new legal instrument is the concept of unlimited liability. Whereas the Warsaw Convention set a limit of 125,000 Gold Francs (approximately US$ 8,300) in case of death or injury to passengers, the Montreal Convention introduces a two-tier system. The first tier includes strict liability up to l00,000 Special Drawing Rights (SDR: approximately US$ 135,000), irrespective of a carrier's fault. The second tier is based on presumption of fault of a carrier and has no limit of liability. The 1999 Montreal Convention also includes the following main elements; 1. In cases of aircraft accidents, air carriers are called upon to provide advance payments, without delay, to assist entitled persons in meeting immediate economic needs; the amount of this initial payment will be subject to national law and will be deductable from the final settlement; 2. Air carriers must submit proof of insurance, thereby ensuring the availability of financial resources in cases of automatic payments or litigation; 3. The legal action for damages resulting from the death or injury of a passenger may be filed in the country where, at the time of the accident, the passenger had his or her principal and permanent residence, subject to certain conditions. The new Montreal Convention of 1999 included the 5th jurisdiction - the place of residence of the claimant. The acceptance of the 5th jurisdiction is a diplomatic victory for the US and it can be realistically expected that claimants' lawyers will use every opportunity to file the claim in the US jurisdiction - it brings advantages in the liberal system of discovery, much wider scope of compensable non-economic damages than anywhere else in the world and the jury system prone to very generous awards. 4. The facilitation in the recovery of damages without the need for lengthy litigation, and simplification and modernization of documentation related to passengers. In developing this new Montreal Convention, we were able to reach a delicate balance between the needs and interests of all partners in international civil aviation, States, the travelling public, air carriers and the transport industry. Unlike the Warsaw Convention, the threshold of l00,000 SDR specified by the Montreal Convention, as well as remaining liability limits in relation to air passengers and delay, are subject to periodic review and may be revised once every five years. The primary aim of unification of private law as well as the new Montreal Convention is not only to remove or to minimize the conflict of laws but also to avoid conflict of jurisdictions. In order to find a rational solution to disputes between nations which have adopted differing liability systems in international air transport, we need fundamentally to reform their countries's domestic air law based on the new Montreal Convention. It is a desirable and necessary for us to ratify rapidly the new Montreal Convention by the contracting states of lCAO including the Republic of Korea. According to the Korean and Japanese ideas, airlines should not only pay compensation to passengers immediately after the accident, but also the so-called 'condolence' money to the next of kin. Condolence money is a gift to help a dead person's spirit in the hereafter : it is given on account of the grief and sorrow suffered by the next of kin, and it has risen considerably over the years. The total amount of the Korean and Japanese claims in the case of death is calculated on the basis of the loss of earned income, funeral expenses and material demage (baggage etc.), plus condolence money. The economic and social change will be occurred continuously after conclusion of the new Montreal Convention. In addition, the real value of life and human right will be enhanced substantially. The amount of compensation for damage caused by aircraft accident has increased in dollar amount as well as in volume. All air carrier's liability should extend to loss of expectation of leisure activities, as well as to damage to property, and mental and physical injuries. When victims are not satisfied with the amount of the compensation for damage caused by aircraft accident for which an airline corporation is liable under the current liability system. I also would like to propose my opinion that it is reasonable and necessary for us to interpret broadly the meaning of the bodily injury on Article 17 of the new Montreal Convention so as to be included the mental injury and condolence. Furthermore, Korea and Japan has not existed the Air Transport Act regulated the civil liability of air carrier such as Air Transport Act (Luftverkehrsgestz) in Germany. It is necessary for us to enact "the Korean Air Transport Contract Act (provisional title)" in order to regulate the civil liability of air carrier including the protection of the victims and injured persons caused by aircraft accident.