• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.30 no.4
• /
• pp.71-94
• /
• 2020

When a dispute or conflict occurs, standard methods for resolving them include resolution by trial or resolutions outside of courts. An alternative dispute resolution method called ADR that aims at remedying disputes instead of filing lawsuits is used commonly throughout the world, including the US and China. ADR, which is a remedy method outside of courts, includes negotiation, arbitration, or mediation between the concerned parties, and the arbitration system has several advantages. The Lemon Law is a consumer protection law of the United States that was enacted in 1975. This law prescribes that when specified quality standards are not met repeatedly due to defects in vehicles or electronic products, the manufacturer must provide exchanges or refunds to consumers. Korea also enacted a newly revised automobile management act, the Korea "Lemon Law," on January 1, 2019, which allows consumers to receive exchanges or refunds from the manufacturer if the same malfunction repeatedly occurs after purchasing a new automobile. There have recently been many cases of large fires occurring while driving import vehicles, causing huge public rage; therefore, interest is being focused on the revised automobile management act. Part 5-2 of the automobile management act was newly added to implement automobile exchange or refund arbitration systems. It is desirable to utilize the arbitration system to smoothly resolve automobile-related disputes that have recently increased significantly, and it is thus being used frequently for practical purposes.

• International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security
• /
• v.22 no.5
• /
• pp.215-219
• /
• 2022

Bankruptcy is one of the major areas that have attracted the interest of many researchers in the American system, particularly in terms of the laws that oversee it. It provides a plan of reorganization that enables the debtor or the proprietor to discharge liabilities to the creditors through dividing the assets to settle debts. This activity is carried out under supervision to fairly protect the interests of the creditors. Bankruptcy protection systems are dynamic and complex in nature, in line with the economic sector, ensuring the protection of affected individuals from falling into huge losses. Some bankruptcy procedures give the debtor the opportunity to stay in operation or business activity and benefit from revenues until the debt is settled. This law allows some debtors to be relived from any financial burden after the distribution of assets, even if the debt is not paid in full. In light of the above information, this research paper seeks to explore the nature of the complexity of bankruptcy protection laws, their characteristics, and the justice system that regulate them. It also sheds more light on the decision-making powers on bankruptcy cases. There are specialized courts that cover bankruptcy cases located in district courts in every state.

• International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security
• /
• v.22 no.12
• /
• pp.125-131
• /
• 2022

The diversity and complexity of criminal, administrative and civil cases resolved by the courts makes it difficult to develop universal automated tools for the analysis and evaluation of justice. However, big data generated in the scope of justice gives hope that this problem will be resolved as soon as possible. The big data applying makes it possible to identify typical options for resolving cases, form detailed rules for the individualization of a court decision, and correlate these rules with an abstract provisions of law. This approach allows us to somewhat overcome the contradiction between the abstract and the concrete in law, to automate the analysis of justice and to model e-justice for scientific and practical purposes. The article presents the results of using dimension reduction, SHAP value, and p-value to identify, analyze and evaluate the individualization of justice and the differentiation of legal regulation. Processing and analysis of arrays of court decisions by computational methods make it possible to identify the typical views of courts on questions of fact and questions of law. This knowledge, obtained automatically, is promising for the scientific study of justice issues, the improvement of the prescriptions of the law and the probabilistic prediction of a court decision with a known set of facts.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.42
• /
• pp.33-66
• /
• 2009

Common law makes a distinction between partial breach and material breach. Attempted definitions of material breach are notoriously unsatisfactory, and the concept of partial breach does not necessarily bear an inverse relationship to substantial performance. This study will review the basic structure of common law contract remedies together with how these remedies are reflected in UCC Article 2 for sale of goods contracts. The matter is complicated because availability of remedy depends on the seriousness of the breach, and the right to cure, and (for sale of goods) these in turn depend on whether the contract is an installment contract or a single performance contract. Common law jurisdictions relegate specific performance of contracts to a last place in the hierarchy of contract remedies. Common law lawyers should recognize that this is the result of historical accident and not the product of some kind of superior intellectual effort. Not only is the attitude of civil law systems toward specific performance quite different, but for international sales contracts in developing nations, a remedy system based on the notion that substitute contracts are readily available(and therefore damage remedies are appropriate) is unrealistic. English common law courts were largely restricted to remedies in the form of monetary damages. For that reason the primary contract remedy at common law has never been specific performance. Rather, common law courts have struggled to develop an appropriate measure of monetary damages for breach of contract. Today, specific performance is viewed as an equitable remedy rather than common law. In the United States the dual court system has been abolished by a merger of law and equity courts into a single court structure. However some historical distinction linger on. The most important is that jury trials are generally not available in actions that seek equitable relief. If a plaintiff seeks in personam relief, such as specific performance of a contract, the action will be viewed as equitable and there will be no entitlement to a jury. Further, equitable relief will be granted only in those situations where the plaintiff pleads and proves that the remedy at law is inadequate. The purpose of this study aims to analyze the remedy system of breach of contract of U.K. and U.S. in the international commercial transactions with criterion of commercial rationality.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.109-136
• /
• 2014

The separability of an arbitration clause is generally recognized throughout the world, but there are no provisions of it under the Federal Arbitration Act(FAA) of the United States. As such, the controversy over the recognition of separability has developed with the rise of certain cases. The Supreme Court recognized this separability based on section 4 of the FAA in the decision of the Prima Paint case. The Court ruled that courts must decide the claim about the fraudulent inducement of an arbitration agreement itself, but they must not decide the claim about the fraudulent inducement of a contract involving a broad arbitration clause, and they have to proceed with the arbitration. The Court said that the subject of an arbitral award is set by the agreement of the parties, and thereby arbitrators can decide the issues about the fraudulent inducement of a contract on the basis of the arbitration clause when it is broad to the point of including the issues. Many courts have extended the separability beyond the fraud context to include other defenses to contract formation in the federal courts such as the occurrence of mistake, illegality, and frustration of purpose. In interpreting the parties' intention of ensuring arbitrator competence, the Supreme Court has treated differently the issues about whether the arbitration agreement exists or not and the issues about whether the preconditions for dispute resolution by a valid arbitration agreement is fulfilled or not. The Court holds that the federal policy in favor of arbitration does not apply to the former issues, and arbitrators can decide theses issues only when parties assign them clearly and unmistakably to them. However, the later issues receive a presumption in favor of arbitration; i.e., when the interpretation of a valid arbitration clause is contested, the arbitrators can decide these issues. In the First Options case, the former issue was questioned. The question of the separability of an arbitration clause is where the validity of the main contract involving the arbitration clause is contested. Therefore, the doctrine of separability did not operate in the First Options case in which the validity of the arbitration clause itself was questioned, and the decision in the First Options was irrelevant to the separability. I think that the Prima Paint case and the First Options case have different issues, and there is no tension between them.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• 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.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.9 no.1
• /
• pp.413-459
• /
• 2008

The Law has intervened to define rare circumstances in which a person should choose continuing life in United States. On the one hand, the law has traditionally acted to preservelife and to respect the sanctity of life. On the other hand, one's control over one's own body, and the right to determine what kind of medical care one will receive, is equally well respected and historically grounded. The competent patients have the right to forgo life-sustaining treatment, courts in United States have left many unanswered questions about the nature of that right. The right to choose to forgo life-sustaining treatment is a manifestation of a patient's autonomy interest. In United States, The Karen Quilan case gave rise to legislative activity in the host of state capitals, and several states had adopted statutes that formally recognized some forms of written directives describing some circumstances in which certain kinds of medical care could be terminated. These statues were sometimes dominated 'living will' acts, sometimes 'right to die' acts and ocasionally 'natural death' acts. Today virtually every state has produced a living will statue. In Korea, courts do not permit a terminally ill person to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment. Living wills apply in case of terminal illness owing to a defect in legislation. Now In Korea, these lively dispute of legal policy on the preconditions and concrete procedure of living will act and natural death act. Through the legislation of living will act and natural death act, we should prepare some circumstances to respect patient's autonomy on the right to die. We should frame the cultural standard to make a decision of forgoing life-sustainin1g treatment under the discreet procedure.

• Journal of the Korea Fashion and Costume Design Association
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.61-74
• /
• 2005

Wonsam, a type of korean women's gown in Choseon Dynasty, was used as a small ceremonial costume for queens, crown princesses and princesses and as a grand ceremonial costume for royal concubines and wives of high rank officials. It was also worn as a wedding dress for commoners. In the families of illustrious officials, it was also used as burial accessories or garments for the dead. In this context, Wonsam is a formal dress for the people's most important four ceremonies of coming-of-age, marriage, funeral, and ancestor worship. It is worth emphasizing the costume since it was widely and importantly used by all ranks of women, from royal families to commoners. Through the Wonsam of An-dong Kim Clan's, we can see what the society was like at the end of Choseon Dynasty. First, a status system that strictly divided costumes for each class, was, in many parts, broken down. Second, the highly wrought patterns and texture of fabrics of the Wonsam reveal that it was granted from Court, or, if woven by the Kim family, it is considered to be produced by the Court's craftsman or through technical transfer, considering that the weaving skills used are as good as those in Courts. Third, regarding the precise needlework that is uncomparable to textiles used by other illustrious officials families, the Wonsam is considered to be granted from Court or, produced through the needlework skills that were handed down from needlewomen in Courts. The Wonsam of An-dong Kim Clan's has noble beauty in it, with outstanding weaving skills, fabrics, needlework and shape. Thus, it is no exaggeration to say that it has those qualities to be the standard costume that inherits the tradition of Korean people.

• The Journal of the Korea Contents Association
• /
• v.16 no.9
• /
• pp.531-544
• /
• 2016

Victim Impact Statement, adopted as a crime victims' right, has been implemented in Korean criminal justice system since 2007, and known that the statement enlarges victims' right in courts and alleviates their suffering resulted from the crime. The statement, however, has raised concerns of infringing on a defendant's procedural rights. Scholars and practitioners had focused more on the legal issue, overlooking psychological effect of the statement to decision-makers in courts. This research reviews fallacy of impact assessment and therapeutic effect from psychological perspective, and also suggests alternatives to assuage the concerns by admission of the statement.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.11 no.1
• /
• pp.75-93
• /
• 2001

The advantages of arbitration such as promptness, economy and flexibility apply to the disputes arising from corporate governance between shareholders and a corporation. The confidentiality of arbitration can be particularly highlighted in the disputes among the members inside corporation. But it appears that the shareholders believe litigation the best way to pursue liabilities of managers of corporation and improve the system of corporate governance. And it is claimed that the current litigation system lacks the implementation of shareholders rights due to structural deficiency and therefore need bring class actions into the system of Korean jurisprudence. The OECD, which afforded the rescue finances to Korea, also recommended shareholder class actions as a way to improve corporate governance. Class actions have merits but even advanced countries consider the changes of existing system or only stay class actions in the stage of discussion. Rather, legal experts urge arbitration to be used more frequently and the Courts also approved the dispute resolutions of the disputes as to corporate governance through arbitration. There is no report in Korea that arbitration was used to resolve the disputes between shareholders and the managers, or between shareholders and corporation, which is listed in the Stock Market. There only are the debates for bring class actions into the judicial system between NGOs and the organizations of corporate managers. But arbitration has greater advantages in resolving the disputes among the members of corporation that any other methods for dispute resolution. Arbitration can interpret flexibly the mandatory provisions of the Statutes of Security and the Code of Commerce to meet the needs of parties involved, which is not possible to the Courts. Arbitration can issue the award to meet the equity of the parties. And arbitration can avoid a resolution of All or Nothing by fully considering the specific situations of Korean corporations(such as family-dominated management) and can issue the award beneficial to all parties of shareholders, managers and corporation. Thus it should be sought to resolve the disputes as to corporate governance through arbitration.