• 한국도서관정보학회지
• /
• 제20권
• /
• pp.455-470
• /
• 1993

In recent years, the intellectual property rights (IPR) are increasingly becoming trade goods and the subject of international trade negotiations. During the past decades, intellectual properties earned critical importance for economic development in both developed and developing countries. Developed countries, headed by the United States, that recognize the economic value of the IPR in the world market are aggressively seeking for universal protection of IPR throughout the world. Intellectual properties have unique qualities that distinguish them from other tangible goods. Most importantly, they are public goods created on the basis of knowledge and information accumulated throughout human history and shared by different cultures. However, there is a growing tendency that the quality of public goods are being etched away as the property concept in IPR expands. In this paper, I discuss how copyright and patent laws incorporated the concept of property right as natural right to one's intellectual creations in early formation of the laws in Europe. I argue that copyright law and patent law are the historical products resulting from political, economic, and ideological factors interacting in a certain society. A history of copyright and patent points to that the intellectual property rights as natural lights of authors and inventors as argued by developed countries in international disputes, are not universal, but unique historical products. Copyright and patent laws have been shaped and developed as regulatory measures by governments to promote and control industries by providing authors and inventors with monopoly incentives. Since property right was used as a regulatory device it was restricted. This is to enhance the distribution of knowledge and information rather than to ensure the property right as an absolute right.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제61권
• /
• pp.191-211
• /
• 2014

This paper intends to study some problems in the application of UCP 600 in the international trade transactions with China. Generally speaking, China complies with UCP 600 well. Nevertheless, there are some problems in the application of UCP 600 in China owing to the difference in law and practices. There are some problems in the application of UCP 600 in China owing to the difference of practices under Bills of Exchange Act and The Provisions of the Supreme People's Court on Some Issues Concerning the Trial of Cases of Disputes over Letter of Credit. The Act insists on the formal requirements, the consistency between a letter amount and a figure amount, the unconditional payment character of bills of exchange. The Provisions include the recognition of revocable credits, the difference of standard in examining documents, the difference in the treatment of issuing banks in relation to discrepant documents. These aforesaid matters of the Act and the Provisions are inconsistent with the practices under the UCP 600. There are two main problems in the operation of letters of credit in China. One is the lack of concerned parties' practice knowledge in relation to letters of credit in China. The other is the inactive stance of nominated banks in China. There are two main problems in relation to judiciary institutions in China. First, judges in China tend to abuse the injunctions owing to the lack of understanding in relation to letters of credit. Secondly, there are inconsistency in the court ruling in China.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제43권1호
• /
• pp.91-107
• /
• 2018

본 연구는 국내 최초로 설립되는 해사중재센터에 대한 실무적 관점에서 활성화 방안을 제시하는데 그 목적을 두고 있다. 따라서 해사중재의 특징과 적합성에 대한 조사를 진행하였으며 해사중재센터가 가지게 될 의의에 대해 제시하였다. 그리고 해사중재센터가 앞으로 해사 분야에서 국제적 명성을 얻기 위해서는 다음의 사항들이 계획성 있게 마련되어 진행되어야 할 것이다. 우선 해사중재에 적합한 중재규칙을 제정해야 한다. 그리고 중재에 있어 가장 중요한 요소라 할 수 있는 중재인 양성 프로그램이 준비되어야 한다. 또한 실무분야에 종사하는 사람들과의 공감대 형성을 위해 다양한 프로그램 개발 및 간담회 등을 추진해야 한다. 이밖에 절차 진행이 제대로 이루어지기 위해 법원 등과의 유대관계가 필요할 것이다. 끝으로 중장기적 전략을 수립하기 위한 방안으로서 학계와 공동으로 연구를 진행해야 할 것이다.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제42권2호
• /
• pp.29-52
• /
• 2017

물품매매계약은 매도인에 의한 물품 및 서류 인도의무의 이행을 통해 매수인에게 소유권을 이전하는 것이 목적이다. 그러나 국제물품매매에서 준거법으로 사용되는 CISG와 Incoterms에서는 소유권 이전에 관한 상세한 규정이 없기 때문에 각국의 국내법을 원용하고 있다. 따라서 본 연구는 한·중 물품매매에서 준거법으로 사용될 수 있는 CISG, Incoterms, 중국 합동법, 한국 민법의 규정적 차이점에 대한 인식 부족으로 인해 발생할 수 있는 분쟁을 예방하고, 한국기업의 대 중국 수출 확대에 기여하기 위하여 매도인의 물품인도의무와 관련하여 물품의 인도장소, 인도시기, 계약적합성과 서류인도의무에 대한 관련 규정들을 비교·분석하였다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권2호
• /
• pp.91-120
• /
• 2020

The Scope of Application of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act and Foreign Investment Act This article examines whether the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act and the Foreign Investment Act of North Korea apply to South Korean parties or companies. This article analyzes laws and agreements related to economic cooperation between South Korea and North Korea. Furthermore, this article compares and evaluates laws related to foreign investment and enacted in North Korea. Now, North Korea's door is closed due to economic sanctions against it, but it will be opened soon. Thus, this article prepares for the future opening of North Korea's markets. Is there a rule of laws in North Korea or just a ruler? Are there laws in North Korea? North Korea has enacted a number of legislation to attract foreign investors, referring to those Chinese laws. For example, North Korea enacted the Foreigner Investment Act, the Foreigner Company Act, the Foreign Investment Bank Act, the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, the Foreign Economic Contract Act, the International Trade Act, and the Free Economy and Trade Zone Act, among others. Article 2 (2) of the Foreign Investment Law of North Korea states, "Foreign investors are corporations and individuals from other countries investing in our country." It is interpreted that South Korea is not included in the "other countries" of this definition. According to many mutual agreements signed by South Korea and North Korea, the relationship between the two Koreas is a special relation inside the Korean ethnic group. An arbitration between a South Korean party and a North Korean party has the characteristics of both domestic arbitrations and international arbitrations. If the South Korea and North Korea Commercial Arbitration Commission or the Kaesong Industrial Complex Arbitration Commission is not established, the possibility of arbitration by the Chosun International Trade Arbitration Commission, established under North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, should be examined. There have been no cases where the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act is applied to disputes between parties of South Korea and North Korea. It might be possible to apply the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act by recognizing the "foreign factor" of a dispute between the South Korean party and North Korean party. It is necessary to raise legislative clarifications by revising the North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act as to whether Korean parties or companies are included in the scope of this Act's application. Even if it is interpreted that South Korean parties or companies are not included in the scope of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, disputes between South Korean companies and North Korean companies can be resolved by foreign arbitration institutes such as CIETAC in China, HKIAC in Hong Kong, or SIAC in Singapore. Such arbitration awards could be enforced in North Korea pursuant to Article 64 of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act. This is because the arbitration awards of foreign arbitration institutes are included in the scope of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act. The matter is how to enforce the North Korean laws when a North Korean party or North Korean government does not abide by the laws or their contracts. It is essential for North Korea to join the New York Convention (Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards) and the ICSID Convention (Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States).

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.121-145
• /
• 2008

Northeast Asia is increasingly making a transition to distinctive and crucial region in the 21st Century and growing into one of world's top three economic spheres along with the EU and NAFTA. In 2003, Korean government announced the Northeast Asian economic hub country plan as an important agenda. As a means of coping with the changing global environment, Korean government designated Incheon in 2003 as the country's first Free Economic Zone ahead of Busan and Gwangyang Bay in the south of the country because Incheon has a geographical advantage linking North America and Europe with Incheon International Airport and Incheon Seaport. The purpose of this paper is to make research on establishment and operation of an arbitral body entitled ${\ulcorner}International Arbitration Center{\lrcorner}$ (IAC) within Incheon Free Economic Zone(IFEZ). For the purpose of this, the writer in this paper, reviewed the necessity of the IAC's establishment and its legal basis as well as the role and function of the Center. Also, the writer presented plans for how to operate the IAC and how to cooperate with the key arbitral organizations of foreign countries for the settlement promotion of commercial disputes including trade and investment. With development of the IFEZ, world-renowned enterprises will invest in the Incheon economic bloc and conduct economic activities, business operation, marketing, logistics, financing, etc. In this connection, diverse types of commercial disputes are expected to occur between foreign companies entering the IFEZ and Korean firms. In this connection, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) has been operating its liaison office in the IFEZ since 2004. However, in view of the increasing arbitration demand, the IAC should be set up in the IFEZ in the near future by the positive support of the government in the respect of both administration and finance because the free economic zone-related law provides for the installation of arbitration organization. For the success of the IAC, the Center will have to provide not only good quality of arbitral services that can satisfy arbitration parties but also need to conduct researches and make efforts so that arbitration can be utilized well in the IFEZ. If the IFEZ can provide advantageous business environments to those multinational enterprises intending to the Incheon economic bloc, the IAC will also contribute to the settlement of commercial disputes arising from the Gaeseong Industrial Complex in North Korea in view of the geographical advantage and logistic benefit of the IFEZ. Finally, this paper also suggests a new model for a joint dispute resolution system by the initiative of Korean government and Korean arbitral organizations for the settlement of commercial disputes within Northeast Asia, for which the CAMCA(Commercial Arbitration and Mediation Center for the Americas) of NAFTA can be a good example.

• 국제지역연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.618-642
• /
• 2009

현재 WTO에 가입한 국가는 국가 간 무역분쟁을 다룸에 있어서 WTO협정의 DSU 등에서 규정하고 있는 분쟁해결제도의 틀을 준수해야 한다. 더욱이 동 협정에서는 지역 자유무역협정을 체결하더라도 WTO의 분쟁해결제도를 원용할 수 있도록 규정하고 있다. 우리나라와 미국은 WTO의 핵심 회원국으로서 주요한 역할을 수행하고 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 한미 자유무역협정에는 별도의 분쟁해결제도를 도입하고 있다. 물론 일부 WTO의 분쟁해결제도를 벤치마킹한 부분이 존재하기도 하지만 분쟁해결을 위한 공동위원회 설치, 분야별 분쟁해결제도 별도 도입 등 상당부분 WTO 분쟁해결제도와는 차별화된 시도를 하고 있다. 본 연구에서는 한미 FTA와 WTO 양자의 무역분쟁해결제도를 상호 비교 고찰함으로써 실효성 측면 등 제 관점에서의 문제점을 도출하고 이를 근거로 그 대안 및 정책적 함의를 제시하고자 하였다. 이는 현재 추진하고 있거나 향후 추진할 FTA 협상에의 반영 및 국가 통상정책수립, 운용의 관점에서도 시사하는 바가 클 것으로 판단되며 특히 우리나라 일각에서는 한미 FTA 분쟁해결규정에 일부 문제가 있다는 지적이 제기되고 있는 바 이러한 관점에서 더욱 논의 및 연구 검토의 필요성이 존재한다.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제26권7호
• /
• pp.167-184
• /
• 2022

Purpose - This paper analyzes all possible issues that need to be considered in case disputes occur with regard to force majeure in international commercial contracts through the comparative study between English and Korean during COVID-19. Design/methodology - This paper belongs to the field of explanatory legal study, which aims to explain and test whether the choice of law is linked to the conditions that occur in the reality of judicial practice. The juridical approach involves studying and examining theories, concepts, legal doctrines, and legislation that are related to the problem. Findings - English law does not permit general economic impracticability to qualify as a valid force majeure event. If a party asserts that they were prevented from performing the contract, the courts will examine this strictly. Many commercial contracts in a broad range of sectors and industries are chosen by parties to be governed by English law. With COVID-19, there have been discussion of parties being released from performance as a result of force majeure. Meanwhile, under Korean law, a force majeure event should be unforeseeable and beyond a party's control. Since COVID-19 is a known event for future contracts, to avoid the risk that a similar situation in the future is deemed foreseeable and under a party's control, parties must ensure that such a risk is properly addressed in a contract. Therefore, it is necessary to have a new clause to cover a pandemic. Originality/value - In light of the ongoing unexpected and uncertain economic impacts COVID-19 is expected to bring to the world, it is anticipated that companies will experience an increased number of claims involving force majeure around the world, including English and Korea. As such, taking proactive steps to assess the applicable legal principles, including the concept of force majeure of contract, will help companies be prepared for the financial or legal implications of COVID-19. In this regard, it would be advisable for companies and businesses to take specific actions.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제34권1호
• /
• pp.27-50
• /
• 2024

This paper examines issues concerning conflicts between arbitral awards and public interests, particularly with respect to economic sanctions. Sanctions have been widely used by political entities, such as States and organizations, as means to promote public interests and to resolve cross-border disputes. In particular, economic sanctions have been increasingly more visible in recent years due to the accelerating fragmentation of the international communities, and their magnitude and range of the impacts have grown accordingly. For example, the U.S. and the EU have imposed economic sanctions on Russia and related persons in response to Russia's invasion of Ukraine. The U.S. recently re-introduced a comprehensive economic sanction on Iran. One of the notable impacts of the sanctions, particularly economic sanctions, is that on international arbitration. Sanctions are essentially built on the notion of the protection of public interests, and public interests are some of the few grounds upon which recognition and enforceability or arbitral awards may be rejected. However, jurisprudence on such conflict between sanctions and arbitral awards have not been sufficiently addressed in Korea because court case and administrative decision records on this conflict have not been sufficiently accumulated. In this regard, this paper begins with offering a survey of the concept of public interests, economic and trade sanctions, arbitral awards and their enforceability, and the relationships between them. It then examines the mechanism upon which public interests, trade and economic sanctions may lead certain arbitral awards unenforceable. Next, the paper suggests judiciaries' balanced approach toward the public interests protected by trade and economic sanctions and the predictability and fairness in the enforcement of arbitral awards. Finally, this paper concludes with the methods of the implementation of such balanced approach.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권3호
• /
• pp.95-113
• /
• 2020

The worldwide diffusion of COVID-19 contributes to electronic commerce all over the world. The proliferation of high volume and small value electronic commerce naturally has combined artificial intelligence with online dispute resolution (ODR). This paper investigates the age effect on Artificial Intelligence acceptability in online dispute resolution and its empirical findings are as follows. First, seven measures out of the nine employed in this case study shows a coherent dynamic pattern over the age spectrum. In other words, the total samples are a heterogenous group rather than a homogeneous one. Second, medium answer occupies a non-negligible portion across answers from nine research questions. It seems to indicate that a considerable portion of Korean respondents are hesitant to make a choice on artificial intelligence at this juncture. Third, all of the respondents agree that the introduction of AI to the dispute resolution could contribute to the hastening of the dispute resolution process. Fourth, most of the respondents agree that artificial intelligence might have the cognitive ability but not the sympathetic or affective ability to handle the electronic commerce disputes.