• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.50-58
• /
• 2023

Bid-rigging is a common issue in public construction projects, and appropriate sanctions are required from the relevant authorities. This study analyzes the need for an optimal enforcement model to prevent bid-rigging by considering both civil and criminal aspects. Recently, there have been overlapping sanctions under the Fair Trade Act, such as fines imposed by the Fair Trade Commission and civil lawsuits filed by the client for damages. The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of penalty surcharges and compensation systems for preventing bid-rigging, and to consider the possibility of overlapping sanctions in public construction projects. It was found that overlapping sanctions under the Fair Trade Act can be helpful in improving the system. However, in cases where the state is the plaintiff for damages in a lawsuit, it is necessary to consider the penalty surcharge and sentence, reduce the penalty surcharge for joint acts, refund the surcharge after a final judgment, and consider the damage compensation system when imposing a surcharge. This study contributes to the development of an efficient enforcement model to suppress bid-rigging in public construction projects by analyzing the improvement effects of sanctions and compensation.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.3-21
• /
• 2023

Chinese law does not directly stipulate the criteria for determining the nationality of arbitral awards, and the Civil Procedure Law stipulates that arbitral awards are divided into domestic arbitral awards and foreign arbitral awards based on the location of the arbitration institution managing the arbitration cases. This indirectly classifies the nationality of the arbitral award based on the location of the arbitral institution. However, with regard to the nationality of eight arbitral awards in this paper made in China by the foreign arbitration institutions, the Chinese courts determined the nationality by arbitrarily selecting the criteria for the location of the arbitration institution and the criteria for the place of arbitration, except for arbitral awards made in Hong Kong. China's unclear attitude toward the criteria for determining the nationality of arbitral award has resulted not only obscures the country that can exercise the right to revoke arbitral award, but also obscures the laws and regulations applied to the approval and execution of arbitral awards. In other words, since the right to revoke the arbitral awards resides with the country of nationality of the awards, such an ambiguous attitude in China prevents the parties from responding to the cancellation lawsuit by predicting the nationality of the arbitral awards in advance. Furthermore, since China made a declaration of reciprocity reservations while joining the New York Convention, in cases where the criteria for location of the arbitral institution is applied, if the arbitration institution belongs to a contracting state, the it must apply the New York Convention to approve and execute arbitration decisions, but if it is not a contracting state, it must be approved and executed by mutual arbitration agreements or reciprocity principles. These results can lead to different results in approval and execution of the same arbitral awards depending on how the nationality is determined.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.20 no.1
• /
• pp.133-162
• /
• 2019

Due to the nature of medical malpractice lawsuits, it is difficult for medical consumers, who are weak in getting information when it comes to health care problem, to secure all information inside the hospital. Even if you are confident about the hospital infection, it is true that people have difficult to obtain medical testimony by expert. It is seen as no easy task to testify to the malpractice of colleagues who work in the same field not only in our country but also abroad, when a doctor gives negative testimony to another doctor in a medical malpractice lawsuit. Although few health care providers will be motivated to take medical care from the outset, testimony or statements from a medical practitioner can have a significant impact on the outcome of a lawsuit, as it is impossible for the patient to control or be aware of the whole process of medical conduct, especially in the event of a hospital infection and the victim. If the hospital can prove the causality of damages caused by negligence of the employees or supervision of the hospital itself in a medical suit caused by the infection, the level of protection of the victim could be raised further. We sought to find a solution to these problems by looking at the provisions of other laws related to hospital infection. In particular, as the comparative legal review regarding hospital infection, Germany's legislative precedent sets a medical contract as a typical civil law contract, so it is thought that looking at German civil law regulations also has implications for Korean law. We also tried to improve the French Special Act 'rights of patients' and we can look at the consequent changes in court cases. Finally, the content of the U.S. case's and the theory of 'the doctrine of res ipsa loquitur' in relation to it show that doctors and hospitals have been forced to shift the burden of proof through this theory. This paper tried to find out the implications of mitigating the burden of proof by reviewing various issues that might be related to medical litigation of hospital infection from a comparative point of view.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.83-109
• /
• 2016

Recently, China has brought many political, economical, and ideological changes in order to complete the "socialistic market economy." In terms of legal system, they make much effort to seek compatibility and stability of law and order. China recognizes that the breakdown of corruption, which is rampant in society, is an essential short-cut for national development. To realize anti-corruption reformation, it strengthens the supervision of relatives and close officials of high-ranking government officials. Recently, China has suffered from expanded trade disputes internationally and has also experienced severe management-labor conflicts domestically due to economic recession. From 2012 onward, civil lawsuit and other litigations have increased sharply. Also, they face severe conflicts in the land system. It is expected that many disputes arise due to speculation on rural housing. Meanwhile, Mongolia expands the size of trade with Korea in mutual cooperation since their diplomatic relation in 1990 by entering more than 20 treaties and agreements. As Mongolia has rich natural resources and Korea is equipped with advanced science and technology, the two countries have opportunities to develop mutually beneficial cooperative relations. Recently, the arbitration system has attracted attention instead of litigation as a means of dispute settlement in line with the expansion of trade between Korea and Mongolia. This study would be helpful to figure out desirable methods for dispute settlements in case of trade disputes among Korean companies that would advance into China and Mongolia.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Surveying, Geodesy, Photogrammetry and Cartography
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.95-103
• /
• 2004

Recently, many troubles about the right of light have been arising ceaselessly as taller and more dense the buildings have been in the urban. The present time, the right of light is not stipulated legally. For solving above problems, there spend so too much lawsuit expenses and time on the damages about construction stopped and delayed, according to subjective decisions instead of scientific and rational solutions. The past studies of the right of light weren't based on the analytic data and depend on the simple view of point. So, those of studies gave trust to people hardly, only were treated as the ways on the decision about construction among non-engineers. Therefore, this paper studies the efficient solution of problems about the right of light through analysis about mass of sunlight according to season and the hour using a simulation technique on the civil construction.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.12 no.5
• /
• pp.79-87
• /
• 2014

In general, at the relationship between claim and obligation if debtor does not fulfill its obligations arbitrarily the creditor can claim to debtor such as lawsuit. It means, despite the debtor ordered payment through the judgment, if debtor disobey that judgment, compulsory execution can be performed by the force of the country. In the end, fulfillment of obligation is enforced by national authorities in principle. However, exceptionally, even it established as a valid debt, if debtors fulfill themselves, they may not be protected from the national authorities. That is the natural obligation. The natural obligation originated from the Roman law which enforces strict type legal system and it is exceptional phenomenon in modern civil law which is made up as that all the bonds are likely to recourse. Therefore, in Korean theory acknowledge that debt is natural obligation and there is no exception. However, there are still controversy about the presence and occurrence of natural obligation. So, in this paper, want to review about its extent and effect including the concept of natural obligation.

• Journal of Cadastre & Land InformatiX
• /
• v.44 no.1
• /
• pp.17-35
• /
• 2014

There is no provision regarding the 'litigation on land boundary' under the Korean laws. Therefore, there are disputes in theory with respect to its nature, requirements for litigation, criteria for determination, etc., and it is necessary to establish the provisions of the law on this issue in the future. For this legislation, it is necessary to conduct a comparative consideration on laws of other countries which have completed the relevant provisions. This study, as a first step, researches a history of litigation for determination of boundary under the Roman law and medieval law, and furthermore introduces the German law which has relatively completed legal provisions on litigation for determination of boundary. In addition to common ownership litigation, the German law has established a provision on litigation for boundary as a judicial procedure considering a special place, called as a dispute on ownership of adjacent land, on the assumption that it is difficult or impossible to prove the boundary. The primary purpose of this litigation is to clarify a true boundary, and if such clarification is impossible, a boundary is discretionally created in accordance with the statutory standards under Article 920 of the German Civil Act (BGB). It means creation of the scope of land ownership by operation of decision, not only by the 'discovery of original boundary'. Both cases are different from each other in the aspect of judicial decision, but embracing them into one is a lawsuit for determination of boundary under the German law. Under the Korean legislation, it is necessary to make a theory containing two different criteria for determination into a single type of litigation, considering such aspects.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.24 no.4
• /
• pp.3-36
• /
• 2023

The main issue in medical malpractice civil litigation is medical negligence and the causal relationship between medical negligence and damages. Regarding the presumption of causality in cases where medical negligence is proven, there is a previous Supreme Court decision 93da52402 on February 10, 1995, but it is difficult to find a case that satisfies the textual requirements of the above decision, and yet, in practice, the above decision is cited. In many cases, causal relationships were assumed, and criticism was consistently raised that it was inconsistent with the text of the above judgment. In its ruling, the Supreme Court reorganized and presented a new legal principle regarding the presumption of causality when medical negligence is proven in a civil lawsuit. According to this, If the patient proves ① the existence of an act that is assessed as a medical negligence, that is, a violation of the duty of care required of an ordinary medical professional at the level of medical care practiced in the field of clinical medicine at the time of medical practice, and ② that the negligence is likely to cause damages to the patient, the burden of proving the causal relationship is alleviated by presuming a causal relationship between medical negligence and damage. Here, the probability of occurrence of damage does not need to be proven beyond doubt from a natural scientific or medical perspective, but if recognizing the causal relationship between the negligence and the damage does not comply with medical principles or if there is a vague possibility that the negligence will cause damage, causality cannot be considered proven. Meanwhile, even if a causal relationship between medical negligence and damage is presumed, the party that performed the medical treatment can overturn the presumption by proving that the patient's damage was not caused by medical negligence. Meanwhile, unlike civil cases, the standard is 'proof beyond reasonable doubt' in criminal cases, and the legal principle of presuming causality does not apply. Accordingly, in a criminal case of professional negligence manslaughter that was decided on the same day regarding the same medical accident, the case was overturned and remanded for not guilty due to lack of proof of a causal relationship between medical negligence and death. The above criminal ruling is a ruling that states that even if 'professional negligence' is recognized in a criminal case related to medical malpractice, the person should not be judged guilty if there is a lack of clear proof of 'causal relationship'.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.18
• /
• pp.385-444
• /
• 2003

Current Military Airbase Law, in an effort to promote safety of military aircraft and security of military airbase, requires an administrative agency or its empowered branch to consult with the Secretary of Defense or the commander of the airbase before they issue a certain administrative approval or decision related to the installation. Although this consultation process purports itself in simplifying what can be an protracted administrative procedure, and in unifying objectives of the military and the administrative services, such procedural requirement is vulnerable inevitability of various legal problems whenever there is a conflict of interests among civil, military, government services. Nor is there sufficient studies done by academian in the area of bureaucratic issues of administrative resolution, and certainly not in the area of the military consultation procedure. This article, with such reality in mind attempts to constructively examine 1) when a consultation application is submitted, whether the discretionary power of the commander of the affected airbase is acknowledged at the outset; 2) if the content of the consultation is deemed unlawful, whether a civilian can institute an administrative lawsuit against it; 3) problems about the subject matters of the consultation requirement within the framework of military airbase law; 4) whether the issuing administrative agency must abide by and issue approval or decision in accordance with the opinion proposed by the said commander; 5) the legal problems of the remedial measure such as an order of removal, appellate review, notion to challenge authority, and etc. in cases such as administrative agency ignoring the commanders proposal or issuing final approval or decision that is inconsistent with what was consulted and agreed upon between both parties.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.49-79
• /
• 2021

Due to defendant's wrongful act by implant surgery, plaintiff has been suffered serious damages to his face and teeth, and pain caused by establishing implanted teeth. Jeonju Appellate Court sentenced to pay future medical expenses and alimony to the plaintiff in compensation for breach of duty or torts. The ruling is designed to relieve the burden of proof because it is extremely difficult for non-experts to determine whether dentists violated their 'duty of care' or whether there was a causal relationship between damages to medial treatment. It was judged that if symptoms that contributed to the patient's significant outcome occurred during or after surgery, such symptoms could be presumed to have been caused by medical negligence if indirect facts were proven to be other than medical negligence. Originally, the shifting of burden of proof in Germany, has already been developed in medical malpractice case since 1940s. In order to guarantee the patients' right, §630h German Civil Code (BGB) - presumption of negligence in the realization of controllable risk- has been also legislated. BGH (Bundesgerichtshof) has been interested in ensuring that the principle of equality between patients and doctors. So, in this study, we wanted to refer to German precedent cases to analyzing Korean medical malpractice lawsuit. In particular, the decision could be significant in that it approaches closer to allows the shifting burden of proof in drastically growing dental malpractice cases. This is clearly confirmed in the judgment of the dentist's "fault" that "if indirect facts about the symptom or occurrence are proven to be cause other than medical negligence, such symptoms can be presumed to be due to medical negligence."