• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.13 no.1
• /
• pp.125-167
• /
• 2003

ADR program is designed to solve the problem such as the increase of suits and decision delayed. ADR program has the several significances, decreasing inappropriate cost as time and burden of courts, providing an approachable measure of relief and more efficient tool for settlement of dispute. Particularly ADR program satisfies the needs Intellectual property disputes need specialists that are versed in the subjected problem and, need to be souled quickly in confidence. And parties concerned are not good at the strict judicial procedure in courts, At this point, ADR program holds some advantages over court proceeding for intellectual property disputes. Specialists can be selected as arbitrators or mediator; Cofidentiality may be preserved; Flexibility allows settlement based on mutual commercial interests; Single solution is possible for multiple disputes involving parties from different countries. However, ADR program has not been properly used in. Korea, which is due to not only the lack of understanding the ADR program, but the poor number of filings and settlements. Intermediaries are not professional and also they do not take active hands in disputes. Sometimes, their fairness is asked as peacemakers. Eventually, it is said that this program is not enough to settle international disputes. To activate the ADR program, we can propose the ADR program annexed to court for example. And we can introduce the conciliation and arbitration to disputes in intellectual property. Traditionally arbitration has been a crucial issue in intellectual property disputes. In that intellectual property rights are granted by the local sovereign power, many legal systems in the past maintained the position that the existence, extent, meaning and application of such rights could only be definitively decided by the granting authority or the courts of that country. There is wide recognition that the arbitration of intellectual property is desirable. The law in most of the major countries has been changed in recent years in favor of arbitrability of intellectual property rights. We can also propose ADR on-line.

• Management & Information Systems Review
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.67-81
• /
• 2016

The purpose of this study was to investigate lots of problems that the current tax appeal system has, which are becoming serious issues as tax appeal cases are recently increasing. Those problems include the unreasonable procedure and period of deliberation on tax appeal cases, permission of a same tax appeal by more than one governmental agencies and the compulsory transposition system of tax appeal cases. All of these problems should be rectified in order to ensure that the currently tax appeal system protect taxpayers' rights and interests effectively. According to the current tax appeal system, the period from the receipt of tax appeal cases to ruling on them is up to 90 days. This is unrealistic, so that period should be allowed to be extended if those cases about more complicated taxation or if they are even harder to be treated for any reason. At present, chief of Tax Tribunal has to unconditionally accept resolution from the meeting of tax judges and make a ruling accordingly because he has no right to reject that resolution. But now, it's time to establish legal grounds based on which the chief suggests the tax judges to reconsider their resolution if it is undoubtedly wrong. Currently, there's a relatively little acceptance of tax appeals from people who can't financially afford to designate a proxy for them. To solve this problem, lots of efforts to make socially recognized the necessity to relive those people's rights and interests and make widely known the Public Proxy of Tax Appeal System. The current tax appeal system allows the Board of Audit and Inspection to be an appealer. This means taxation may be deliberated on by more than one governmental agencies. It is so inefficient. Therefore, tax appeal by the board should be only about taxation that they found unacceptable by audit and inspection. Except for this, it is not allowed that the Board of Audit and Inspection file tax appeals that are, in turn, necessarily transported to the National Taxation. Esecially, the transposition should be a procedure that is occasionally taken. In sum, this study investigated problems with the current tax appeal system, and made suggestions about solutions that are not theoretical but practical.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.33 no.2
• /
• pp.225-266
• /
• 2018

In 2017, 1,252 cases of damages relief related to air passenger transport service were received by the Korea Consumer Agency, a 0.8% drop from 1,262 cases in 2016, the first decline since 2013. In 2017, 444 cases (35.4%) out of received cases of damages relief in the field of air passenger service received by the Korea Consumer Agency were agreed on, and out of cases that were not agreed on, the most number of 588 cases (47.0%) were concluded due to information provision and counseling, and 186 cases (14.9%) were applied to the mediation of the Consumer Dispute Mediation Committee. Major legislations that contain regulations for the damages relief and disputes resolution of air service consumers include the Aviation Business Act and the Consumer Fundamental Act, etc. The Aviation Business Act provides the establishment and implementation of damage relief procedure and handling plan, and the receiving and handling of request of damage relief by air transport businessman, and the notice of protection standard for air traffic users. The Consumer Fundamental Act provides the establishment and management of the consumer counseling organization, the damage relief by the Korea Consumer Agency, the consumer dispute mediation, and the enactment of the criteria for resolving consumer disputes. The procedures for damages relief of air service consumers include the receiving and handling of damages relief by air transport businessman, the counseling, and receiving and handling of damages relief by the Consumer Counseling Center, the advice of mutual agreement by the Korea Consumer Agency, and the dispute mediation system by the Consumer Dispute Mediation Committee. The current system of damage relief and dispute mediation for air service consumer have the problem in the exemption from obligation of establishment and implementation of damage relief plan by air transport businessman under the Aviation Business Act, the problem in the exemption from liability in case of nonfulfillment and delay of transport by aviation businessman under the criteria for resolving consumer disputes in the aviation sector, and the uppermost limit in procedure progress and completion of consumer dispute mediation under the Consumer Fundamental Act. Therefore, the improvement measurements of the relevant system for proper damage relief and smooth dispute mediation for air service consumer are to be suggested as follows: First is the maintenance of the relevant laws for damage relief of air service consumer. The exemption regulation from obligation of establishment and implementation of damage relief plan by air transport businessman under the Aviation Business Act shall be revised. To enhance the structualization and expertise of the relevant regulation for protection and damage relief of air service consumer, it will be necessary to prepare the separate legislation similar to the US Federal Regulation 14 CFR and EU Regulation EC Regulation 261/2004. Second is the improvement of criteria for resolving air service consumer disputes. For this, it will be necessary to investigate whether the cause of occurrence of exemption reason was force majeure, and distinguish the exemption from liability in case of nonfulfillment and delay of transport by aviation businessman under the criteria for resolving consumer disputes in the aviation sector, and revise the same as exemption reasons regulated under the air transport chapter of the Commercial Act and Montreal Convention 1999, and unify the compensation criteria for the nonfulfillment of transport that the substitute flight was provided and the delay of transport. Third is the reinforcement of information provision for damage relief of air service consumer. Aviation-related government agencies and concerned agencies should cooperate with airlines and airports to provide rapidly and clearly diverse information to the air traffic users, including laws and policies for damages relief of air service consumers. Fourth is the supplement to the effectiveness, etc. of consumer dispute mediation. If there is no sign of acceptance for dispute mediation, it is not fair to regard it as acceptance, therefore it will be necessary to add objection system. And if a dispute resolution is requested to another dispute settlement agency in addition to the Consumer Dispute Mediation Committee, it is excluded from the damage relief package, but it should be allowed for the party to choose a mediation agency. It will be necessary to devise the institutional measures to increase the completion rate of mediation so that the consumer dispute can be resolved efficiently through the mediation. Fifth is the introduction of the air service consumer arbitration system. A measure to supplement the limitations of the consumer dispute mediation system is to introduce the consumer arbitration system, but there are two measurements which are the introduction of the consumer arbitration under the Consumer Fundamental Act and the introduction of the consumer arbitration under the Arbitration Act. The latter measurement is considered to be appropriate. In conclusion, as a policy task, the government should prepare laws and system to enhance the prevention and relief of damages and protection of the rights and interests of air service consumers, and establish and implement the consumer-centric policy for the advancement of air service.

• Journal of International Area Studies (JIAS)
• /
• v.14 no.3
• /
• pp.421-440
• /
• 2010

This paper examines middle powers' ODA policy in the post cold war era and discusses its implication for Korean aid strategy. Middle powers' ODA has been more successful than that of super powers in promoting donors' positive images and in stimulating recipient countries' development. Middle powers tend to pursue multilateral solutions to international problems often by taking a mediator role, and their ODA policies set them apart from the great players in international politics. Middle powers' ODA is primarily aimed at reducing poverty and protecting human rights in least developed countries where humanitarian aid needs the most rather than promoting donors' interests. Also, middle powers have provided bilateral untied aid in the sectors of food aid and emergency relief and steadily devoted about 0.7% of their gross national income to ODA. Meanwhile, Korea as an emerging middle power and a new donor has been implementing its own aid strategy under the name of the Korean development model since the post cold war period. The Korean ODA was not successful in building donors' positive images by simply following the short term strategies of US and Japan. Yet, its ODA policy has been quite effective in sustaining local development by creating specific niches in which the country can specialize in. In specific, Korea has focused on developing the sectors of information and communication technology and industry energy in recipients' countries by maximizing its comparative advantage.