• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.6 no.1
• /
• pp.129-153
• /
• 2004

In order to succeed in e-Trade Project in Korea, the related parties endeavor to introduce the e-title registry model such as Bolero model(Title Registry Model) and TEDI model (Repository Service Provider Model). Prior to mentioning the Model of e-Title Registry, desirable Global e-Trade Platform is the platform connecting Global e-Trade Platforms in each country and Bolero's Core Messaging Platform and e-Title Registry must be established in each country. Each e-Title Registry must be connected with another registry. Like Korea, Recognized Electronic Document Repository must be established as proxy for preserving, attesting, carrying out sending and receiving electronic document to prevent from disputes between parties and to carry out notarizing electronic documents and related transaction. The purpose of this paper is to promote the introduction of e-Title Registry in the e-Trade and to streamline the procedures of the electronic bill of lading.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.23 no.3
• /
• pp.118-137
• /
• 2019

Purpose - As global trade disputes intensify and global trade uncertainty increases due to the prevailing trade protectionism all over the world, mega-FTAs such as the RCEP and CPTPP are suggested as strategic trade policy options for export-driven small open economies, such as Korea. This paper aims to provide a comprehensive analysis of Korea's mega-FTA participation and the induced implications for the Korean economy. Design/methodology - We use a multi-region, multi-sector global CGE model, and investigate the different effects of both the US-China and US-EU trade wars on the relative changes in GDP, welfare, and trade under different trade policy regimes; (i) Korea does not participate in any mega-FTA, (ii) Korea participates in the RCEP, and (iii) Korea participates in the CPTPP. Findings - We show, among others, that though industrial effects might be largely varied, the overall enlarging of free trade zones through multilateral mega-FTA participation may contribute significantly to the macroeconomic soundness and stability of Korea, even when global trade protectionism prevails. Under RCEP and CPTPP trade regimes, Korea's GDP may increase even when the global trade environment deteriorates as trade wars occur and intensify between the US and China, or between the US and EU. It is also estimated that RCEP participation increases Korea's GDP, welfare (measured in equivalent variation), and total trade by 1.12%, $1.09 billion, and 2.54%, respectively, while CPTPP participation increases them by 0.19%, $0.92 billion, and 0.13%, respectively. Originality/value - Existing studies usually focus on the direct impacts of mega-FTA participation on macroeconomic variables such as GDP, welfare, and trade, and do not consider the possible buffer effects of a mega-FTA when the global trade environment worsens. In this paper, we analyze and quantify not only the direct impacts of RCEP and CPTPP on the main macroeconomic variables but also the possible buffer effects of the RCEP and CPTPP in the cases of the US-China and US-EU trade wars.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.16 no.1
• /
• pp.81-119
• /
• 2006

The parties in the trade can have full autonomy and can resolve disputes independently, impartially and without delay by selecting arbitration by agreement. Korea and Japan had revised their Arbitration Laws to incorporate as many provisions of the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law as possible. Japan had amended its century-old arbitration law, becoming the 45th country to adopt the UNCITRAL Model Law on International commercial arbitration. New Arbitration Law was enacted as Law No.138 of 2003 and effective on March 1, 2004, is applicable to both national and international arbitration. Korea had amended its arbitration law on December 31, 1999 and its New Arbitration Law incorporates the most of the 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law as Japan. Arbitration must be popular in resolving international commercial disputes in Northeast Asian bloc in order to increase the volume of intra-trade in the Northeast Asian bloc. But in order for the parties to make use of arbitration in the bloc, the arbitration laws of nations in the bloc must have similarity and unification. As Korea and Japan playes important roles in the bloc, both nations's arbitration laws must be studied in view of similarity and difference to unify both nations' arbitration laws by way of showing an example. Therefore, this paper deals with both nations' arbitration laws in view of comparative law to unify their arbitration laws and Northeast Asian Nations' arbitration laws.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.43 no.1
• /
• pp.25-45
• /
• 2018

International commercial arbitration is an inseparable part of today's international commerce. International transactions are becoming increasingly complex. Problems brought by multi-party and multi-contract arbitration pose problems for traditional arbitration systems. The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) has released updated International Arbitration Rules(2016 Rules) and has adopted innovations similar to those introduced in the rules of major international arbitration institutions in recent years. The changes in the 2016 Rules are intended to increase the efficiency of the arbitral process, and introduce the process for consolidation of claims. For international commerce contracts, it would be appropriate, and necessary, to adopt a multi-party arbitration clause, as consolidated arbitration provides effective resolutions for multi-party disputes.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.27 no.1
• /
• pp.183-203
• /
• 2017

Two solution approaches have been suggested globally to solve the crisis of bill of lading; that is to say, electronic bill of lading and sea waybill. Electronic bill of lading is not unsettled as a solution to solve the crisis of bill of lading but sea waybill is used on a global basis to do so. The surrendered bill of lading is applied for practical usage instead of sea waybill in a short voyage among Korea, China, and Japan, owing to faster delivery at destination and lower cost than bill of lading. To surrender the original bill of lading, the consignor should submit all originals with a request letter to the carrier of goods with necessary surrender charges, if any, in doing so. Once after receiving the original bills of lading consisting of normally three originals but in some cases five, the carrier stamped "Surrendered" on the front of original bills of lading and sent a message to his counterpart at the port of destination, stating that the original bill of lading surrendered at the port of shipment and the consignee can take delivery of the goods without production of the original bill of lading at destination. The legal regime of the surrendered bill of lading is not settled as it is not considered legally as bill of lading, and the decisions rendered by each nation's courts are different according to the usages of the surrendered bill of lading. The purpose of this paper is to prevent the disputes between parties with regard to the surrendered bill of lading by studying the causes and precautions of disputes in relation to the surrendered bill of lading.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.29-47
• /
• 2014

In recent years, with the rapid development of electronic commerce, companies engaging in e-commerce want to take advantage of fast and easy way to solve ever-growing disputes online. South Korea's e-commerce disputes are mainly solved by mediation process of Korea E-commerce Mediation Committee. The whole process of online mediation can be carried out by the network, with the advantages of high efficiency and speed. On the other hand, the introduction of CIETAC's online Arbitration Rules in China meets the actual needs. Especially the requirement of hearing trials' procedures should be easier and faster, making the dispute can be resolved in a short time. Furthermore, the whole process from applying to ruling is conducted online, which meets the needs of e-commerce business that want to solve the disputes faster and more efficient. In addition, the cost of online arbitration is much lower than the average arbitrations. The implementation of the CIETAC's Online Arbitration Rules, will further promote the development of e-commerce in China. With the increase of trade volume between China and Korea, the e-business are also increasing. Although South Korea has not yet implemented online arbitration until now, CIETAC's effort for combining arbitration and mediation have good implications for development Korea's e-commerce online dispute system to promote e-Commerce between Korea and China.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.49-73
• /
• 2012

India is a gigantic market with a population of 1.2 billion and an economy that is growing at the second-fastest pace in the world. The volume of trade between India and Korea has been sharply increased with the increase of dispute since 2000. Although avoidance of disputes is always a priority, it is also important to prepare methods of dispute resolution which are efficient and economical. So, understanding of Indian dispute resolution system is a necessary requirement for successful business operation with Indian companies. This article analyzed and compared with the various ways of Indian ADR such as negotiation, mediation, conciliation, Lok Adalat and arbitration in order to help the Korean traders who enter into business with the Indian companies to settle their disputes efficiently. In conclusion, this article suggests the following ways to overcome problems of dispute with Indian companies: First, the Korean companies should recognize the characteristics of Indian ADR Ways respectively. Second, the Korean companies should utilize the conciliation or the mediation in small claim but arbitration in large claim. Third, Write a contract and insert the KCAB's standard arbitration clause in their contract.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.46 no.6
• /
• pp.143-162
• /
• 2021

Although awareness of the need to respond to climate change is expanding, various controversies are being raised about the EU's Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM). The EU has announced that they will implement CBAM as responding to climate change and preventing carbon leakage. However, the questions are raised as to whether it is actually effective in preventing carbon leakage. Above all, CBAM has its own contradictions, thus it could not be easy to implement. This is because the possibility of violation of the WTO principles is high and there are many issues in implementation. Emission Trading System (ETS) based on CBAM differs by country, and international linkage is not easy in that ETS is not a widely used system worldwide. The EU's CBAM is highly likely to be used as a trade restrictive tool, and is inevitably subject to trade disputes in that it imposes additional tariffs. The unilateral implementation of CBAM should be restrained unless support from the international community and consideration for developing countries are not taken into account.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• 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.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.47-69
• /
• 2010

From the review of Korean arbitration systems with the comparison of those of other countries, we can summarize some issues to be tackled as follows: First, Korean arbitration system started with the purpose of export promotion. This may be the main reason that various domestic disputes have not been resolved by arbitration. Second, the Korean Arbitration Law applies to private disputes. The Law's arbitration scope is wider than that of China and France, but narrower than that of the U.S.A. that encompasses a variety of disputes in the filed of consumer, labor, medical services, patents, etc. Third, active judges or public officials in Korea can not be arbitrator and there is no arbitration court. However, if chief judge allows the necessity, court's judges in the UK can be arbitrator with the mutual agreement of the parties and also arbitration system is operated in the court. Fourth, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB), the only representative institution for arbitration in Korea, is under the Ministry of Knowledge Economy(MKE). This makes it difficult for the KCAB to handle other disputes related to the Ministry of Health and Welfare, the Ministry of Strategy and Finance, the Ministry for Food, Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, the Ministry of Employment and Labor, etc. Fifth, as mentioned, the KCAB is the unique institution for arbitration by the Law in Korea, while other countries allow have a diversity of arbitration agencies such as maritime arbitration organization, consumer arbitration institution, arbitration court, etc. Therefore, we suggest some ideas to expand the arbitration's area of coverage in Korea as follows: First, there should be more active policies that promote various domestic disputes to be settled by the arbitration system. Second, it is quite needed to expand the scope of arbitration to cover many disputes in the fields of consumer, labor, medical service, advertising, fair trade, etc. Third, there should be discussions to allow court judges as arbitrator and to introduce the arbitration court. Fourth, the KCAB should strengthen its status and roles as general arbitration organization to overcome the limited scope of commercial disputes. For this, there should be the strong support and coordination among the MKE and other government agencies. Fifth, to reduce the burden of the court's complicated and expensive procedures, more efficient disputes resolution systems should be established on the basis of the parties' free will. Each central government agency should streamline the legal barriers to allow industrial organizations under its control to establish their own or joint arbitration system with the KCAB.