• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제23권1호
• /
• pp.3-32
• /
• 2008

In proportion to recent developments in aviation technology and growth of the air transport market, the risk of damages to third parties caused by aircrafts and the likelihood of unlawful interference on an aircraft in flight has grown larger. The war risk insurance market was paralyzed by the 9/11 terror event. And if another event on the scale of 9/11 occurs, compensations for third party damages will be impossible. Recognizing the need to modernize the existing legal framework and the absence of a globally accepted authority that deals with third party liability and compensation for catastrophic damage caused by acts of unlawful interference, the ICAO and various countries have discussed a liability and compensation system that can protect both third party victims and the aviation industry for the 7 years. In conclusion, in order to provide adequate protection for victims and the appropriate protection for air transport systems including air carriers, work on modernizing the Rome Convention should be continued and the new Convention should be finalized in the near future. Korea has not ratified the relevant international treaties, i.e. Rome Convention 1933, 1952 and 1978, and has no local laws which regulate the damage caused by aircraft to third parties on land. Consequently, it has to depend on the domestic civil tort laws. Most of the advanced countries in aviation such as the United States, England, Germany, France and even China, have incorporated the International Conventions to their national air law and governed carriers third party liability within their jurisdiction. The Ministry of Justice organized the Special Enactment Committee for Air Transport chapter under Commercial Law. The Air Transport chapter, which currently includes third party liability, is in the process of instituting new legislation. In conclusion, to settle such problems through local law, it is necessary to enact as soon as possible domestic legislation on the civil liability of the air carrier which has been connected with third party liability and aviation insurance.

• KSII Transactions on Internet and Information Systems (TIIS)
• /
• 제10권8호
• /
• pp.3826-3851
• /
• 2016

With traditional data storage solutions becoming too expensive and cumbersome to support Big Data processing, enterprises are now starting to outsource their data requirements to third parties, such as cloud service providers. However, this outsourced initiative introduces a number of security and privacy concerns. In this paper, homomorphic encryption is suggested as a mechanism to protect the confidentiality and privacy of outsourced data, while at the same time allowing third parties to perform computation on encrypted data. This paper also discusses the challenges of Big Data processing protection and highlights its differences from traditional data protection. Existing works on homomorphic encryption are technically reviewed and compared in terms of their encryption scheme, homomorphism classification, algorithm design, noise management, and security assumption. Finally, this paper discusses the current implementation, challenges, and future direction towards a practical homomorphic encryption scheme for securing outsourced Big Data computation.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제12권1호
• /
• pp.171-205
• /
• 2002

ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) is a system to settle disputes without having to pursue a judgment through the courts; it provides an alternative to conventional judicial proceedings. As such, ADR is available to resolve a wide range of disputes, ranging from minor disagreements between neighbors to contracts involving millions of dollars. One can say there has been “efficient resolution of a dispute” only when it has been settled rapidly and finally to the satisfaction of all parties concerned, inexpensively and in a transparent manner. In this respect, ADR may well be regarded as the most efficient method to resolve disputes. In order to establish and disseminate ADR as a practical dispute-settlement procedure, first, governmental financial support is necessary, rather than having to depend upon fees collected from the disputing parties. At the same time, various inducement policies also are required. The most important factor is to make people aware of the fact that ADR is a low-cost, speedy system and more practical compared with other procedures. Second, cooperation from legal circles, lawyers in particular, is absolutely necessary. If disputes become serious, the general public normally seeks out lawyers for advice. Third, disputing parties have to be convinced of the benefits of ADR, secure in the knowledge that ADR will provide them not only with economic benefit but also a satisfactory result. Diverse ADR procedures should be developed and implemented to facilitate participation in a comfortable atmosphere with a mutually friendly relationship. The most important factor in achieving the wider use of ADR, which is attracting more attention of late, is the expectation that it will bring a satisfactory resolution to the related parties in dispute. The trend of seeking a new dispute-settlement method also reflects the changing sense of values in society today. Therefore, one specific method is not suitable for all kinds of disputes. A proper system should offer different approaches according to the pattern and type of dispute and the parties concerned. In selecting a dispute-resolution system, several factors have to be considered - the relationship between the parties, their financial situations, the necessity of maintaining confidentiality, urgency for settlement, etc. In the light of all these, it is desirable for the disputing parties to select the most appropriate of the available systems, not blindly turning to the courts, if and when a dispute arises.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권4호
• /
• pp.55-76
• /
• 2013

This study aims to analyze the main features of Mongolian arbitration system compared with Korean Arbitration Law which was revised under the UNCITRAL Arbitration Model Law. On the basis of this comparative study, certain differences are suggested: First, the environment of Mongolian arbitration is still insufficient in terms of its operation and usage at the international level. Second, the Mongol National Arbitration Court has established Ad-hoc Arbitration Rules and has promoted Ad-hoc Arbitration although it is an institutional arbitration organization. Third, the arbitration objects are defined as the types of tangible and intangible assets in Mongolia which are different from those of the Korean Arbitration Law. Accordingly, court and officer disputes, family disputes, labor-management relations, and criminal matters are covered by the arbitration objects. Fourth, Mongol Arbitration Law specifies the following persons disqualified for arbitrator appointment: the member of the Constitutional Court, judge, procurator, inquiry officer, investigator, court decision enforcement officer, attorney, or notary who has previously rendered legal service to any party of the disputes, and any officials who are prohibited by laws to be engaged in positions above the scope of their duties. Fifth, the arbitrator selection and appointment criteria should be documented, and the arbitrator should have the ability to resolve the disputes independently and fairly and achieve concord from both parties. Sixth, if there is no agreement between the parties, the arbitration language should be Mongolian, and the arbitral tribunal has no power to decide on it. Seventh, despite the agreement for a documentary hearing between the parties, there should be provided opportunities for an oral hearing if either of the parties requires it. Eighth, if the parties do not understand the language of the arbitration, the parties can directly ask the translation service. They should also keep secrets in the process of arbitration. Ninth, the cancellation of arbitral award is allowed by the application of the parties, not by the authority of the court. Except for the nine differences above, the Mongolian arbitration system is similar to that of the Korean Arbitration Law. This paper serves to contribute to the furtherance in trade relationship between Mongolia and Korea after the rapid and efficient resolution of disputes.

• 분석과 대안
• /
• 제4권2호
• /
• pp.103-132
• /
• 2020

The purpose of this study is to observe whether intergenerational differences exist in support among major Korean political parties and, if so, how they exist, based on the results of the survey conducted nationwide. To achieve the purpose of the study, a questionnaire was prepared based on conjoint analysis, and the collected data was analyzed by applying a random parameter logit model. The main results of model analysis are summarized as follows. First, among the policy variables, statistically significant results were observed in the generation of 20s and 30s for the education variable. It was found that both 20s and 30s aimed for equal education at a higher level than other generations. Especially, the highest intensity aim for equal education culture was observed in the 20s. Second, the coefficients of major political parties were observed with a high level of statistical significance. This appears to be a result suggesting that voters decide on their voting behavior through thorough policy comparisons in addition to comprehensive consideration on various current issues. Third, a clear support for conservative parties was observed in the generation of 20s. A clear and intense distribution of preference for political parties classified as conservatives was observed in the 20s generation, which can be said to be mainly college students. This seems to be a profound founding related to the issue of "conservatization of the 20s," which has recently become a hot topic in Korean society. Fourth, a high level of support for progressive parties was observed in the 30s and 40s. The Justice Party can be classified as a minority party in the National Assembly House as of January 2019. Nevertheless, it was maintained at a relatively high level in national recognition, and it is presumed that the background was high level of support from the 30s and 40s. Fifth, a large level of standard deviation was observed in the preference for conservative parties in the 50s. This means that some respondents who are in their 50s or older strongly support the Liberty Korea Party, and some respondents in the same generation strongly disapprove it. Due to this countervailing power, it seems that the average support level for the Liberal Korean Party is low in the generations of 50s and older.?

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제29권1호
• /
• pp.3-29
• /
• 2019

A franchise business is a business in which the owners, or "franchisors," sell the rights to their business logo, name, and model to third party retail outlets, owned by independent, third party operators, called "franchisees." There are a number of features in franchising or terms in franchise agreements that may lead to disputes between franchisors and franchisees. These disputes may arise because of underlying risks in the franchise relationship, franchise agreement, or conduct of the parties. In this case, ADR is an effective way to resolve disputes in a quicker and often less costly way than having to go to court. If an agreement cannot be reached through mediation, then arbitration becomes the next step to resolving the differences. Whereas mediation is non-binding and focused on facilitating the parties to find a resolution that is acceptable to both, arbitration is binding and may result in a decision that is not acceptable to one of the parties. These situations can be resolved through experienced arbitration as arbitration allows franchisees to settle matters promptly and outside of the public eye. In addition, franchise dispute arbitration is usually less costly than going to traditional court. Considering all of these, reaching an agreement will also have typical clauses that address the issue of dispute resolution. It is again a more efficient process than going through the legal process and courts and is often less costly. By going through arbitration, the parties agree to give up their rights to pursue the dispute in the courts. However, there is a problem that the arbitration prior to the agreement and under the terms would be contrary to the restriction of jurisdiction under the "ACT ON THE REGULATION OF TERMS AND CONDITIONS" in Korea.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제69권
• /
• pp.23-43
• /
• 2016

This study describes the exclusion of the seller's liability for defects in title under CISG and UCC. Through comparing two provisions, this article provides contracting parties with guidance regarding choosing governing laws and practical advice. CISG and UCC states not only the seller's liability for defects in title but also the exclusion respectively. Under two provisions, contracting parties who wish to avoid this liability may agree that the liability will not apply. Under UCC ${\S}$2-213(2), the seller's warranty can be disclaimed by specific language in the contract or by the circumstances surrounding the transaction. Although there is no express exclusion provision under CISG Article 41 and 42, Article 6 allows contracting parties to agree that they may exclude the application of the seller's liability. Both Article 42 under CISG and ${\S}$2-213(3) under UCC provide where the buyer furnishes specification to the seller. Under UCC ${\S}$2-213(3), it is the buyer's warranty to hold the seller harmless from any claims which arise from the seller complying with specification furnished by the buyer. But, under CISG Article 42, the seller's duty is excluded if the third party right or claim result from the fact that the seller has complied with specifications provided by the buyer. Therefore Article 42 does not charge the buyer with the duty, but rather limits the circumstances under which he could cause claims under Article 42. Interestingly, CISG has provisions which are absent from UCC. First, under Article 41, the seller escapes the liability if the buyer agree to take the goods subject to the third party right or claim. Second, under Article 42(2)(a), the seller is not liable if the buyer knew or could not have been unaware of the third party right or claim at the time of the conclusion of the contract.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제15권3호
• /
• pp.113-137
• /
• 2005

In the provisions of 'the Arbitration Law of China, there are special provisions for international arbitration. When a court refuses the recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards or cancel the domestic awards relating to international arbitration, they have to adopt the provisions of 'Chinese Civil Procedure Law'. These provisions are the same as the provisions of Korean Civil Procedure Law concerning the reasons of renewal. In the Korean Arbitration Act, those provisions disappeared when it was revised on December 31, 1999. Among the characteristics of the Chinese arbitration system, a serious question is that it provides only institutional arbitration and there is no ad-hoc arbitration in the Chinese Arbitration Law. On the other hand, when the parties appoint three arbitrators according to their agreement, the parties appoint the third arbitrator by mutual agreement and when they fail to agree, the Arbitration Committee appoints the third arbitrator. In practice, as the parties hardly agree on the third arbitrator or sole arbitrator, the Committee usually appoints them. And appointing an arbitrator from out of their panel of arbitrators is permitted these days only under examination by the Arbitration Committee in accordance with the arbitration rules of the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission, Other arbitration committees except the China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission are still prohibited from making appointments from out of their panel of arbitrators. Accordingly, arbitration in China cannot be predicted and poses a question about legal stability as party autonomy is restricted in the appointment of arbitrators and arbitral procedure. Such being the case it is strongly recommended to select Korea as the place of arbitration in transactions with China. However it is better to arbitrate than to file a law suit in China.

• 한국항공운항학회지
• /
• 제17권4호
• /
• pp.94-106
• /
• 2009

오늘날 항공기사고는 우리나라뿐만 아니라 세계도처에서 때때로 발생되고 있다. 특히 항공기에 대한 갑작스러운 테로 공격 또는 일반 항공사고에 기인된 항공기의 추락 및 물건의 낙하로 인하여 지상에 있는 제3자에게 손해를 입히는 경우가 간혹 발생되고 있다. 이와 같은 항공사건에 있어 가해자(항공기 운항자)는 피해자(지상 제3자 등)에 대하여 불법행위책임을 부담하게 되는데 이러한 사건들을 해결하기 위하여 1952년의 개정로마조약과 1978년의 몬트리올의정서 등이 있음으로 본 논문에서는 이들 조약의 성립경위 및 주요내용과 개정이유 등을 간략하게 설명하였다. 특히 2001년 9월 11일에 뉴욕에서 발생된 이른바 항공기 납치에 의한 동시다발 테러 사건의 피해는 4대의 항공기에 탑승한 승객 및 승무원 266명이 전원 사망하였고 워싱턴에 있는 미국 방성청사에서의 사망 및 실종이 125명, 세계무역센터에서의 사망 및 실종이 약5,000여명에 달하는 막대한 피해가 발생되었다. 9/11참사사건은 지상에 있는 제3자의 인적 및 물적 손해가 거액에 달하였음으로 이에 따라 영국의 로이드보험 등 세계보험업계가 크게 손실을 입게 되어 항공보험을 기피하는 현상이 생겨나 법적인 문제점이 제기되었다. 국제민간항공기구(ICAO)에서는 9/11사태 이후 이와 같은 테로 사건의 법적대응책과 자구책을 마련하기 위하여 약 8년간의 심의 끝에 항공기에 대한 테로 공격(불법방해 행위)과 1952년 개정로마조약의 현대화(일반위험) 등 새로운 2개 조약을 2009년 5월 2일에 성립시켜 공표하였다. 상기 새로운 2개의 조약 중 첫째 조약은 항공기의 불법방해 행위에 기인된 제3자에 대한 손해 배상에 관한 조약(Convention on Compensation for Damage to Third Parties, Resulting from Acts of Unlawful Interference Involving Aircraft: 일명 불법방해조약이라고 호칭함: Unlawful Interference Convention)이고 둘째 조약은 항공기에 기인된 제3자에 대한 손해배상에 관한조약 (Convention on Compensation for Damage Caused by Aircraft to Third Parties: 일명 일반위험 조약이라고 호칭함: General Risk Convention) 이다. 본 논문에서는 이 새로운 2개 조약에 대한 ICAO가 주관한 성립경위와 주요 내용 및 필자의 논평을 제시하였고 이들 조약에 대하여 한국의 조속한 비준을 촉구하는 바이다.

• 문화기술의 융합
• /
• 제8권1호
• /
• pp.175-190
• /
• 2022

비인격적 감독행위는 사회적 맥락에서 발생하기 때문에 피해자와 가해자, 두 당사자와 만의 문제가 아니며, 이를 목격하는 제3자와의 상호작용과 개입 역시 중요하게 고려되어야 한다. 그러나 비인격적 감독행위 연구는 그동안 당사자 간 관계에 치중해왔고, 제3자 반응에 대한 연구가 최근 부상하는데도 불구하고 관련 국내 연구는 여전히 미진한 상황이다. 본 연구는 최근까지 진행된 비인격적 감독의 제3자 반응 연구를 체계적으로 검토함으로써, 비인격적 감독행위 연구영역의 확장에 기여하고자 한다. 선행연구를 검토한 결과, 상사의 비인격적 감독행위를 목격한 제3자는그 사건의 의미에 대한 해석 및 평가라는 인지적 매개과정과, 피해자의 아픔에 공감하거나 이를 고소해하는 등의 정서적 매개과정을 거치는 것으로 나타났다. 이후 제3자는 궁극적으로 행동 반응을 보이는데, 피해자에게 도움을 제공하거나 상사에게 맞서기도 하고, 때로는 반대로 피해자를 괴롭히거나 배제하기도 한다. 또한 직무태도 및 성과 측면에서 스스로 영향을 받기도 한다. 이때, 어떠한 조건에서 제3자가 피해자를 돕거나 돕지 않는지, 그 경계조건을 규명하기 위해 수행된 선행연구에서 제3자의 개인적 특성이나 피해자와의 관계, 그리고 목표나 공정성 관련 조직 상황요인들의 유의미한 조절효과를 다수 확인하였다. 이처럼 제3자의 반응양태는 직접적인 피해자의 반응과 비교할 때 그 스펙트럼이 넓은데, 이러한 다양한 반응양태를 촉발하는 메커니즘을 규명하기 위해 본 연구에서는 선행연구에서 이론적 토대로 삼았던 다섯 가지 접근법들을 전체적으로 함께 조망해본다. 더불어 비인격적 감독행위의 제3자 연구에서 발견된 방법론상의 문제점을 검토하고, 이를 극복하기 위해 선행연구에서는 어떤 해결책들을 모색하는지 살펴보았다. 마지막으로, 후속 연구를 수행할 때 참고할만한 몇 가지 연구 방향을 제안하였다.