• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.42 no.3
• /
• pp.123-142
• /
• 2017

This study is to investigate Right to Chinese Name for Foreigners under Trademark Law of the People's Republic of China. The basketball star Michael Jordan sued Qiaodan Sports in 2012, saying the company had built its business around his Chinese name read as Qiaodan in Chinese without his permission. The Chinese supreme court ruled that the trademark for Jordan's Chinese name should be returned to China's State Administration for Industry and Commerce to be re-awarded, and it means Qiaodan Sports Co. must stop using the Chinese characters for Qiaodan on its merchandise. However, the court rejected Jordan's claim to the romanized or pinyin form of the name "Qiaodan," saying in its judgment that this version may not be closely linked with him. People who want to claim the right to Chinese name, he/she must prove the specific name has linked with him/her. Furthermore, he/she must prove the Chinese firm's actions had displayed "malicious intent" by registering trademarks for his/her Chinese name. The courts approve infringement by Chinese firm and stop to use his/her name in the country.

• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.121-130
• /
• 2022

Recently, as soldiers are allowed to use mobile phones, cases are frequently transferred from the police to the military due to criminal acts, and digital evidence is collected separately from the reliability of previous investigations, such as overlapping seizure and search procedures. In this study, through in-depth interviews with practitioners in charge of digital evidence in the military, police, and courts, problems related to digital evidence handling, such as infringement of evidence ability due to overlapping human factors and procedures, are derived and analyzed. The presented procedure verified the effectiveness of the procedure through case analysis, and is expected to contribute to the guarantee of the evidence capacity of digital evidence and the efficiency of handling cases.

• Journal of Software Assessment and Valuation
• /
• v.15 no.2
• /
• pp.51-57
• /
• 2019

On increasing illegal software copyright, the need for similarity analysis is now rising. The reliability of object material are becoming important when it's moving from developer to evaluation experts. Object material as a comparison data, is the important data to the evaluation expert which is delivered from agencies such as courts and police stations. The object material is submitted at first to the Copyright Commission and then delivered to the evaluation expert with safe. However, if the similarity result is not satisfied to the both side, they will claim to the reliability of the object material such as source code modification or revision etc. Software objects is produced in a file format and are recognized as being able to be modified. Therefore, the reliability to the object material is studied in various ways, and a forensic is proposed as one method. This study showed the suggestion to keep reliability of the object material through the actual evaluation cases.

• Journal of the Korean Applied Science and Technology
• /
• v.40 no.6
• /
• pp.1322-1329
• /
• 2023

This study attempted to verify how the selection attribute affects customer satisfaction and participation intention to provide basic data for the efficient operation strategy of domestic futsal fields. Therefore, people who used domestic futsal fields were selected as samples, and convenience sampling methods were used. The final analysis used 271 copies of data. The data processing was conducted with the SPSS (ver. 21.0) program, which conducted frequency analysis, factor analysis and reliability analysis, correlation analysis, simple and multiple regression analysis. First, the results of the study showed that domestic futsal field selection attributes had a significant impact on customer satisfaction in the order of service, convenience, price, and facility. Second, customer satisfaction had a significant effect on participation intention. Third, the optional attributes had a significant impact on participation intention in the order of facility, service, convenience, and price. Summarizing the above results, it is believed that domestic futsal courts need to provide facilities and services that allow consumers to enjoy futsal games more conveniently and safely.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Library and Information Science
• /
• v.58 no.2
• /
• pp.33-56
• /
• 2024

In this study, we analyzed the current situation of court libraries and aimed to propose a future-oriented strategy for preserving and managing their collections. Based on literature and status analysis, the study presents the future preservation strategy of court library collections in three main categories: First, securing space for the long-term preservation of court library collections; second, establishing a system for collecting and preserving court library collections; and third, performing digital archiving for the permanent preservation and utilization of court records, valuable legal volumes, administrative materials, and other judiciary-specific resources. Through this, court libraries, including those in various courts, should resolve the issue of insufficient collection storage space, preserve holdings systematically and efficiently, and activate library use.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.8 no.4
• /
• pp.105-121
• /
• 2006

This study is related with the judgements of our country's supremcourt against the transaction of Letter of Credit which is beneficiary's fraudulent trade deal. In this case I think to analyse the judgements and to present the basic grounds on which the judgements were established. In Letter of Credit transaction, there are the major parties, such as, beneficiary, issuing bank, or confirming bank and the other parties such as applicant, negotiating bank, advising bank and paying bank. Therefore, in this cases, the beneficiary, the French Weapons' Supplier who did not shipped the commodities, created the false Bill of Lading, let his dealing bank make payment against the documents presented by him and received the proceeds from the negotiating bank or collecting bank, thereafter was bankrupted and escaped. For the first time, even though the issuing bank conceived that the presented documents were inconsistent with the terms of L/C. it did not received the payment approval from the applicant against all the discrepancies, made the negotiating bank pay the proceeds to exporter and thereafter, delivered the documents to the applicant long after the time of the issuing bank's examination of documents. The applicant who received the documents from the issuing bank, instantly did not examine the documents and inform to the issuing bank whether he accepted the documents or not. Long time after, applicant tried to clear the goods through custom when he knew the bill of ladings were false and founded out the documents had the other discrepancies which he did not approved. As the results, the applicant, Korea Army Transportation Command claimed, that the issuing bank must refund his paid amount because issuing bank examined the documents unreasonably according to u.c.p 500 Act 13th, 14th. In spite of the applicant's claim, the issuing bank argued that it paid the proceeds of L/C reasonably after receiving the applicant's approval of an discrepancy of document, the delayed shipment, but for concerning the other discrepancies, the trivial ones, the applicant did not examined the document and noticed the discrepancies in reasonable time. Therefore the applicant sued the issuing bank for refunding it's paid proceeds of L/C. Originally, this cases were risen between Korea Exchange Bank and Korea Army Transportation Command. As result of analysing the case, the contents of the case case have had same procedure actually, but the lower courts, the district and high courts all judged the issuing bank was reasonable and did not make an error. As analysing these supreme court's judgements, the problem is that whether there are the applicant's liability of examining the documents and informing its discrepancies to the issuing bank or not, and if the applicant broke such a liabilities, it lost the right of claiming the repayment from issuing bank. Finally to say, such applicant's liabilities only must be existed in case the documents arrived to the issuing bank was delivered to the applicant within the time of the documents examination according to u.c.p 500 Act 14, d. i. But if any the documents were delivered to applicant after time of the documents examination, the applicant had not such liabilities because eventhough after those time the applicant would have informed to the issuing bank the discrepancies of documents, the issuing bank couldn't receive repayment of its paid proceeds of document from the negotiating bank. In the result after time of issuing bank's examination of documents, it is considered that there's no actual benefit to ask the applicant practice it's liability. Therefore finally to say. I concluded that the Suprem Court's judgement was much more reasonable. In the following, the judgements of the supreme court would be analysed more concretely, the basic reasons of the results be explained and the way of protecting such L/C transaction would be presented.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.17 no.3
• /
• pp.3-30
• /
• 2007

The New York Convention(formally called "United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards") done in New York on June 10, 1958 has been adhered to by more than 140 States at the time of this writing, including almost all important trading nations from the Capitalist and Socialist World as well as many developing countries. The Convention can be considered as the most important Convention in the field of arbitration and as the cornerstone of current international commercial arbitration. Korea has acceded to the New York Convention since 1973. When acceding to the Convention, Korea declared that it will apply the Convention to the recognition and enforcement of awards made only in the territory of another Contracting State on the basis of reciprocity. Also, Korea declared that it will apply the Convention only to differences arising out of legal relationships, whether contractual or not, which are considered as commercial under the national law of Korea. The provisions relating to the enforcement of arbitral awards falling under the New York Convention begin at Article III. The Article III contains the general obligation for the Contracting States to recognize Convention awards as binding and to enforce them in accordance with their rules of procedure. The Convention requires a minimum of conditions to be fulfilled by the party seeking enforcement. According to Article IV(1), that party has only to supply (1) the duly authenticated original award or a duly certified copy thereof, and (2) the original arbitration agreement or a duly certified copy thereof. In fulfilling these conditions, the party seeking enforcement produces prima facie evidence entitling it to obtain enforcement of the award. It is then up to the other party to prove that enforcement should not be granted on the basis of the grounds for refusal of enforcement enumerated in the subsequent Article V(1). Grounds for refusal of enforcement are stipulated in Article V is divided into two parts. Firstly, listed in the first Para. of Article V are the grounds for refusal of enforcement which are to be asserted and proven by the respondent. Secondly, listed in Para. 2 of Article V, are the grounds on which a court may refuse enforcement on its own motion. These grounds are non-arbitrability of the subject matter and violation of the public policy of the enforcement country. The three main features of the grounds for refusal of enforcement of an award under Article V, which are almost unanimously affirmed by the courts, are the following. Firstly, The grounds for refusal of enforcement mentioned in Article V are exhaustive. No other grounds can be invoked. Secondly, and this feature follows from the first one, the court before which enforcement of the award is sought may not review the merits of the award because a mistake in fact or law by the arbitrators is not included in the list of grounds for refusal of enforcement set forth in Article V. Thirdly, the party against whom enforcement is sought has the burden of proving the existence of one or more of the grounds for refusal of enforcement. The grounds for refusal of enforcement by a court on its own motion, listed in the second Para. of Article V, are non-arbitrability of the subject matter and public policy of the enforcement country. From the court decisions reported so far at home and abroad, it appears that courts accept a violation of public policy in extreme cases only, and frequently justify their decision by distinguishing between domestic and international public policy. The Dec. 31, 1999 amendment to the Arbitration Act of Korea admits the basis for enforcement of foreign arbitral awards rendered under the New York Convention. In Korea, a holder of a foreign arbitral award is obliged to request from the court a judgment ordering enforcement of the award.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.1
• /
• pp.47-85
• /
• 1989

The Fundamental purpose of the Warsaw Convention was to establish uniform rules applicable to international air transportation. The emphasis on the benefits of uniformity was considered important in the beginning and continues to be important to the present. If the desire for uniformity is indeed the mortar which holds the Warsaw system together then it should be possible to agree on a worldwide liability limit. This liability limit would not be so unreasonable, that it would be impossible for nations to adhere to it. It would preclude any national supplemental compensation plan or Montreal Agreement type of requirement in any jurisdiction. The differentiation of liability limits by national requirement seems to be what is occurring. There is a plethora of mandated limits and Montreal Agreement type 'voluntary' limits. It is becoming difficult to find more than a few major States where an unmodified Warsaw Convention or Hague Protocol limitation is still in effect. If this is the real world in the 1980's, then let the treaty so reflect it. Upon reviewing the Warsaw Convention, its history and the several attempts to amend it, strengths become apparent. Hijackings of international flights have given rise to a number of lawsuits by passengers to recover damages for injuries suffered. This comment is concerned with the liability of an airline for injuries to its passengers resulting from aviation terrorism. In addition, analysis is focused on current airline security measures, particularly the pre-boarding screening system, and the duty of air carriers to prevent weapons from penetrating that system. An airline has a duty to exercise a high degree of care to protect its passengers from the threat of aviation terrorism. This duty would seemingly require the airline to exercise a high degree of care to prevent any passenger from smuggling a weapon or explosive device aboard its aircraft. In the case an unarmed hijacker who boards having no instrument in his possession with which to promote the hoax, a plaintiff-passenger would be hard-pressed to show that the airline was negligent in screening the hijacker prior to boarding. In light of the airline's duty to exercise a high degree of care to provide for the safety of all the passengers on board, an acquiescene to a hijacker's demands on the part of the air carrier could constitute a breach of duty only when it is clearly shown that the carrier's employees knew or plainly should have known that the hijacker was unarmed. A finding of willful misconduct on the part of an air carrier, which is a prerequisite to imposing unlimited liability, remains a question to be determined by a jury using the definition or standard of willful misconduct prevailing in the jurisdiction of the forum court. Through the willful misconduct provision of the Warsaw Convention, air carrier face the possibility of unlimited liability for failure to implement proper preventive precautions against terrorist. Courts, therefore, should broadly construe the willful misconduct provision of the Warsaw Convention in order to find unlimited liability for passenger injuries whenever air carrier security precautions are lacking. In this way, the courts can help ensure air carrier safety and prevention against terrorist attack. Air carriers, therefore, would have an incentive to increase, impose and maintain security precautions designed to thwart such potential terrorist attacks as in the case of Korean Air Lines Flight No.858 incident having a tremendous impact on the civil aviation community. The crash of a commercial airliner, with the attending tragic loss of life and massive destruction of property, always gives rise to shock and indignation. The general opinion is that the legal system could be sufficient, provided that the political will is there to use and apply it effectively. All agreed that the main responsibility for security has to be borne by the governments. I would like to remind all passengers that every discovery of the human spirit may be used for opposite ends; thus, aircraft can be used for air travel but also as targets of terrorism. A state that supports aviation terrorism is responsible for violation of International Aviation Law. Generally speaking, terrorism is a violation of international law. It violates the soverign rights of the states, and the human rights of the individuals. I think that aviation terrorism as becoming an ever more serious issue, has to be solved by internationally agreed and closely co-ordinated measures. We have to contribute more to the creation of a general consensus amongst all states about the need to combat the threat of aviation terrorism.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.109-133
• /
• 2007

The legal labyrinth through which we have just walked is one in which even a highly proficient lawyer could easily become lost. Warsaw Convention's original objective of uniformity of private international aviation liability law has been eroded as the world community ha attempted again to address perceived problems. Efforts to create simplicity and certainty of recovery actually may have created less of both. In any particular case, the issue of which international convention, intercarrier agreement or national law to apply will likely be inconsistent with other decisions. The law has evolved faster for some nations, and slower for others. Under the Warsaw Convention of 1929, strict liability is imposed on the air carrier for damage, loss, or destruction of cargo, luggage, or goods sustained either: (1) during carriage in air, which is comprised of the period during which cargo is 'in charge of the carrier (a) within an aerodrome, (b) on board the aircraft, or (c) in any place if the aircraft lands outside an aerodrome; or (2) as a result of delay. By 2007, 151 nations had ratified the original Warsaw Convention, 136 nations had ratified the Hague Protocol, 84 had ratified the Guadalajara Protocol, and 53 nations had ratified Montreal Protocol No.4, all of which have entered into force. In November 2003, the Montreal Convention of 1999 entered into force. Several airlines have embraced the Montreal Agreement or the IATA Intercarrier Agreements. Only seven nations had ratified the moribund Guatemala City Protocol. Meanwhile, the highly influential U.S. Second Circuit has rendered an opinion that no treaty on the subject was in force at all unless both affected nations had ratified the identical convention, leaving some cases to fall between the cracks into the arena of common law. Moreover, in the United States, a surface transportation movement prior or subsequent to the air movement may, depending upon the facts, be subject to Warsaw, or to common law. At present, International private air law regime can be described as a "situation of utter chaos" in which "even legal advisers and judges are confused." The net result of this barnacle-like layering of international and domestic rules, standards, agreements, and criteria in the elimination of legal simplicity and the substitution in its stead of complexity and commercial uncertainty, which manifestly can not inure to the efficient and economical flow of world trade. All this makes a strong case for universal ratification of the Montreal Convention, which will supersede the Warsaw Convention and its various reformulations. Now that the Montreal Convention has entered into force, the insurance community may press the airlines to embrace it, which in turn may encourage the world's governments to ratify it. Under the Montreal Convention, the common law defence is available to the carrier even when it was not the sole cause of the loss or damage, again making way for the application of comparative fault principle. Hopefully, the recent entry into force of the Montreal Convention of 1999 will re-establish the international legal uniformity the Warsaw Convention of 1929 sought to achieve, though far a transitional period at least, the courts of different nations will be applying different legal regimes.

• Journal of Legislation Research
• /
• no.41
• /
• pp.337-366
• /
• 2011

In this article, I intend to analyze the definition of an employee under the Trade Union Act in Japan. Recently, the Supreme Court of Japan held that not only opera singer but also customer engineer is an employee under the Act. Conclusions are as follows:First, it is noteworthy that the Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle of all circumstances established by CBC case. The case focused on deciding that who is an employee under the Act. Notwithstanding this holding of the Supreme Court, district courts and courts of appeals, in deciding this kind of question, have emphasized especially on the side of a legal right and obligation on a contract between an employer and a potential employee. Therefore an independent contractor has not been generally recognized as an employee under the Act. However, even though he or she was, as an independent contractor in name, offering its work to his or her putative employer, the Supreme Court applied the principle of all circumstances to both cases and held in favor on the workers on April, in 2011. Second, the Supreme Court failed to make a general legal principle for deciding that who is an employee under the Act. According to the above holdings of the Supreme Court, nobody can anticipate wether he or she is an employee or not in a concrete case. Finally, the Supreme Court did not also make its opinion clearly about the relations between an employee of the Section 3 of the Act and an employee whom an employer employs under the Section 7(2) of the Act. In conclusion, it can be said that the Supreme Court has narrowly and strictly interpreted an employee of the Section 3. That is to say, only where an employee is recognized as an employee of the Section 7(2), the employee will be also an employee of the Section 3. In Japan, however, the majority interprets that an employee by the Section 3 should be distinguished from the employee whom an employer employs by the Section 7(2). Consequently, according to the majority opinions, unemployed persons, students and citizens will be also included in the definition of an employee by the Section 3.