• 수산해양교육연구
• /
• 제11권2호
• /
• pp.150-183
• /
• 1999

Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement concluded in 1965 made a contribution to the stable development of fisheries relationship for both countries until the year of 1980. From the time on thereafter a series of respectable fishery disputes occurred throughout the period of fisheries self-regulation in accordance with alteration of home and abroad conditions. And both countries marched into a cooperation era by enforcement of the new fisheries agreement from the 23 January 1999, because the Fisheries Agreement system of 1965 had many limitations to settle the fundamental fisheries problems. In this paper, the author carried out the legal interpretation, arrangement of historical facts and evaluation of actual results of the Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement of 1965. The key contents of the Fisheries Agreement were the establishment of 12-nautical mile exclusive fishery zone and the joint-control fishery zone under the principles of maintenance of MSY for fishery resources, freedom of high seas and mutual cooperation. The legal foundation of the conclusion of the Fisheries Agreement were the San Francisco Peace Treaty of 1952 and the four International Conventions on the Law of the Sea of 1958. During the 33 years, the fisheries power of Korea made a rapid stride, on the other hand that of Japan was almost stagnated. And in the meantime, there were very important development on the international law of the sea, for instant, the settlement of 12-nautical mile territorial sea regime and the establishment of 200-nautical mile exclusive economic zone regime. Annual meetings of the Joint Fisheries Committee were not successful to fill the role for conservation of fishery resources. The Fisheries Self-Regulation Agreement concluded in 1980 was also insufficient to accept the new international regime on the law of the sea, for that reason it was terminated on 23 January 1999. But it is true that the Fisheries Agreement of 1965 made a contribution to normalization of fisheries relationship between both countries and fisheries development of Korea.

• Geomechanics and Engineering
• /
• 제1권1호
• /
• pp.17-34
• /
• 2009

There has been growing agreement that geotechnical reliability-based design (RBD) is necessary for establishing more advanced and integrated design system. In this study, resistance factors for LRFD pile design using CPT results were investigated for axially loaded driven piles. In order to address variability in design methodology, different CPT-based methods and load-settlement criteria, popular in practice, were selected and used for evaluation of resistance factors. A total of 32 data sets from 13 test sites were collected from the literature. In order to maintain the statistical consistency of the data sets, the characteristic pile load capacity was introduced in reliability analysis and evaluation of resistance factors. It was found that values of resistance factors considerably differ for different design methods, load-settlement criteria, and load capacity components. For the total resistance, resistance factors for LCPC method were higher than others, while those for Aoki-Velloso's and Philipponnat's methods were in similar ranges. In respect to load-settlement criteria, 0.1B and Chin's criteria produced higher resistance factors than DeBeer's and Davisson's criteria. Resistance factors for the base and shaft resistances were also presented and analyzed.

• 한국지역지리학회지
• /
• 제16권3호
• /
• pp.265-274
• /
• 2010

조선 후기에 풍수설은 사족촌의 형성 과정에서 종족 터전의 번영과 인물 번성이라는 유교적 담론으로 통용되어 사족층의 정치 사회 경제적 세력화를 위한 향촌 지배 이데올로기로 활용되었다. 사족층의 향촌사회 세력화와 지배를 위한 풍수적 방식은, 입지 국면의 설정을 통한 상징화, 종족 상징 경관의 풍수적 배치를 통한 장소적 권위 확보, 풍수비보물의 관리를 통한 통제, 분산(墳山) 확보를 통한 산림의 사유화 등이 있었다.

• 한국지반공학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국지반공학회 2010년도 추계 학술발표회
• /
• pp.1015-1023
• /
• 2010

While various PCPT-based methods for the analysis of consolidation were developed, additional laboratory test is needed to estimate the coefficient of consolidation. In this paper, hyperbolic method using PCPT dissipation curve for the estimation of coefficient of consolidation was proposed. To verify proposed method, field settlement test data and PCPT dissipation test data at same site were collected and analyzed. It is observed that proposed method shows good agreement with measured field settlement data.

• Geomechanics and Engineering
• /
• 제8권6호
• /
• pp.845-857
• /
• 2015

The 3D numerical analysis is carried out to investigate the settlement behavior of flexible mat foundations subjected to vertical loads. Special attention is given to the improved analytical method (YS-MAT) that reflects the mat flexibility and soil spring coupling effect. The soil model captures the stiffness of the soil springs as well as the shear interaction between the soil springs. The proposed method has been validated by comparing the results with other numerical approaches and field measurements on mat foundation. Through comparative studies, the proposed analytical method was in relatively good agreement with them and capable of predicting the behavior of the mat foundations.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제58권
• /
• pp.99-124
• /
• 2013

International commercial arbitration is a specially formed mechanism for the final and binding settlement of disputes arisen between contracting parties regarding procedures, structures or other contractual relationship agreed by them. It is a resolution system which is processed autonomously by arbitrators who are appointed by contracting parties without involving the national court. If the contracting parties want to settle their disputes by arbitration, there must be a valid agreement. With a valid agreement, the most important concern is which law(called as the substantive law) should be applied in order to determine the rights and obligations of both contracting parties in relation to the dispute. At this point, the substantive law is really important because it is applied to the dispute itself directly during proceedings as well as it plays an crucial role in scrutiny and enforcement of arbitral awards. This article discusses about the substantive law under international commercial arbitration, specially focusing on the regulations of the ICC rules of arbitration, which is the most widely used all over the world and UNCITRAL Model law, which most countries' rule and laws are based on. By discussing how these rules and regulations should be interpreted and applied, it is expected to provide practical help to practitioners when they agree on an arbitration agreement.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제47권5호
• /
• pp.129-145
• /
• 2022

Recently, Korean customs authorities have attempted to impose customs duties on the warranty charges paid by Korean subsidiaries ("the taxpayers") of multinational corporations to their overseas headquarters, or their affiliates, as indirect payment of the price actually paid or payable for imported goods and services, and the taxpayers' complaints have been steadily increasing. The key issue of Korean Supreme Court decision, 2018Du56619, revolves around opposing interpretations of the Korea Customs Act and the WTO's Customs Valuation Agreement in determining who is responsible for paying duties levied on warranty charges. The Supreme Court's ruling was consistent with its previous interpretations of the WTO agreement on customs valuations. The Supreme Court ruled in favor of the plaintiff, a Korean subsidiary, stating that the overseas corporate headquarters' payments of warranty charges to Korean dealers are made on behalf of the Korean subsidiary, which is ultimately responsible for covering warranty charges. Thus, the Korean subsidiary's settlement of the warranty charges to their Korean dealers through the overseas headquarters is effectively the same as a direct payment to the dealers. Therefore, the Korean subsidiary performed warranty services on its liability and account. As such, the court ruled that warranty charges should not include tariffs on the indirect payment for warranty services in such cases. This paper presents the comparative legal implications for the warranty charge clauses in the WTO agreement and the Korean Customs Act and analyzes the Supreme Court's decisions.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제34권2호
• /
• pp.27-44
• /
• 2024

The lack of consistency and predictability of arbitral awards in the Investor-State Dispute Settlement ("ISDS") mechanism has long been a subject of criticism. In international investment disputes, arbitral tribunals have frequently come up with different interpretations and results on similar investment agreement provisions. The arbitral tribunal's inconsistent decisions raised concerns not only among the parties to the investment dispute but also amongthe arbitral tribunals in other cases, which ultimately led to legal inconsistencies in international investment law. Arbitration awards may have some degree of disagreement in interpretation. However, the systemic inconsistencies that pervade ISDS risk undermining the purpose of the investment agreement system, which is to provide a predictable and stable framework to protect andpromote foreign investment while maintaining a balance with host state regulations. Therefore, this study proposes a plan to resolve this discrepancy and review standards for practical application. Reform of the ISDS mechanism could be a viable option to reduce, to some extent, the inconsistencies in interpretation, if not completely eliminate them. Reforms such as establishingguidelines, promoting cooperation between arbitral tribunals, and codifying the norms of the agreement can provide a means of reducing interpretive inconsistencies and strengthening the legitimacy of the ISDS mechanism. Reforming the ISDS mechanism will require all stakeholders to carefully consider the issues and the scope, nature, and feasibility of eachpotential reform.

• 한국콘텐츠학회논문지
• /
• 제13권12호
• /
• pp.702-714
• /
• 2013

한중일은 새로운 경제성장을 위한 고민과 더불어 외자를 유치함에 있어 새로운 도전과 어려움에 직면해 있다. 향후 한중일 FTA는 3국간의 투자를 더욱 촉진 할 것으로 기대되고 있다. 이 논문은 한중일 3국간의 투자에 관한 법적체계와 제약요소 및 투자규칙에 관한 연구를 하였다. 3국간의 무역경제 관계와 투자흐름을 검토하고, 이를 배경으로 3국의 외국투자에 관한 법적체계 및 투자규칙에 관한 검토를 통하여 상대국에 있어서 투자에 관한 주요한 제약이 무엇인지, 향후 한중일 FTA는 3국간의 투자를 더욱 촉진하기 위해서는 한중일 FTA 투자 장(章)에 포함해야 할 것이 무엇인지를 제시하고자 하였다. 한중일 FTA는 3방향의 투자 흐름을 원활화하고 3국간에 투자자와 투자보호를 강화하기위한 효과적인 수단이 될 것이다. 이 점에서 향후 한중일 FTA 투자 장은 내국민 대우, 최혜국대우, 특정조치의 이행요구의 금지 및 경영진이나 이사회의 국적 요건, 자금의 이전, 세이프가드 조치, 수용 및 보상, 손실에 대한 보상, 공정 형평 대우, 투자자 대 국가의 분쟁 해결 및 3국 간 합의 된 다른 요소를 포함해야한다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제25권4호
• /
• pp.3-23
• /
• 2015

The Chevron saga including Chevron/TexPet v. Ecuador, PCA Case No. 34877(hereinafter referred to as "Chevron I") and Chevron/TexPet v. Ecuador, PCA Case No. 2009-23(hereinafter referred to as "Chevron II") started out of domestic litigations between TexPet and Ecuador in the early 1990s. In Chevron I, the Tribunal decided that Article 2(7) of the U.S.-Ecuador BIT on effective means of provision was breached because of undue delays in the seven legal proceedings TexPet had brought against Ecuador in respect to contractual obligations. In Chevron II, it was contended that through the actions and inactions of the judiciary and the executive, Ecuador breached her several obligations under the BIT. Ecuador objected to the jurisdiction of the Tribunal because TexPet's investment was terminated in 1992, and because Chevron is not a party to the 1995 Settlement Agreement and 1998 Final Release. In its Interim Award on Jurisdiction and Admissibility, the Tribunal applied a prima facie standard to the facts alleged by the Claimants but denied by the Respondent, and decided that questions in respect of the Respondent's jurisdictional objections should be joined to the merits under Article 21(4) of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. In the merits phase of Chevron II, the Tribunal divided the merits of the Parties' dispute into two parts, entitled "Track 1" and "Track 2". In its Partial Award on Track 1, the Tribunal decided that Chevron is a "Releasee" under the 1995 Settlement Agreement. In a decision on "Track 1B", the Tribunal decided that the Lago Agrio complaint cannot be read as pleading "exclusively" or "only" diffuse claims, and that, to this extent, the Claimants' reliance on the 1995 Settlement Agreement as a complete bar to the Lago Agrio complaint must fail, as a matter of Ecuadorian law. The Tribunal maintained the position that the Parties' disputes on both merit and jurisdiction should be reserved for Track 2. It remains to be seen how the Tribunal addresses the Claimants' allegations of multiple denials of justice under international law against the judgments of the Respondent's Courts, together with the Respondent's jurisdictional objections in Track 2 of the arbitration.