• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.267-301
• /
• 2005

Following the increased economic corporations between the South and North Korea, many companies participate the corporation program. They needs insurance policy as a scheme for the transfer of risk from those individual company to it to an insurer. This paper review the possibility of the North Korea insurance authorities and research the origin, history, structure and context of the North Korea insurance law. The North Korea Insurance law differ from the South Korea and China's. North Korea Insurance authority has not capability of doing insurance business both side of underwriting and indemnity. Partly, it caused the uncertainty, insufficient and vague of the insurance law. The writer conclude that the North Korea insurance law faced to the needs of modernization. Especially, the Gyesung Industrial Complex Insurance Regulation couldn't cover the investor and company's risk because it is not based on the nature and basic principles of insurance.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.8 no.1
• /
• pp.137-177
• /
• 2007

The medical expenses review system in Korea has developed under fee-for-service system with its own unique structure. The importance of reviewing medical expenses has been emphasized, as the size of medical expenditures moving through the health insurance legal context and its weight in the national economy have increased very rapidly. It is, however, analyzed that the feuds and arguments continue among the stakeholders for the lack of laws supporting the medical expenses review system. The medical expenses review is a series of administrative procedures, deciding whether claims from medical care institutions to the insurer are legal and valid or not. It mainly controls the increase of unnecessarily excessive health insurance claim and prevents fraudulent claim and abuse and checks the less use or unsuitable use of medical resources. It also works a function guarantees medical benefits for the appropriate treatment according to the object of health insurance system as a social insurance scheme. The dispute on legal base of the medical expenses review is about the source of law in the medical expenses review. There are the Health Insurance Act and administrative laws as jus scriptum and the guidelines of review as administrative orders. The medical expenses review should reflect various factors, such as the development of medical healthcare technologies, the health expenditures distribution, the financial situation of the health insurance, and the evaluation on the level of appropriate benefits. It is also likely to adapt to the traits of characters of medicine, and trends and transition, Besides it should judge the legality and the validity of medical benefits expenditures by synthesizing these all factors. And the evaluation system of appropriateness of medical benefits was administrative procedure which was consecutive with reviewing the medical expenses system and it was intended to make up for the result of reviewing the medical expenses in more comprehensive levels.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.44
• /
• pp.85-107
• /
• 2009

L/C allows the exporter to have a bank's payment undertaking against shipping documents required by L/C. This means that the exporter can take export proceeds from a L/C issuing bank regardless of importer's payments and therefore the L/C better mitigate importer's credit risk compared to remittance and collections. Recently the use of L/C has been on down trend in line with increasing use of T/T, causing a big change of payment system. This tells that the payment method change in Korea is positive as the change also happens same in developed countries. This however gives more buyer's credit risk to exporters and therefore a systematic solution to this negative effect is required. In Korea, export credit insurance has been widely used to cover the buyer's credit risk. But the export credit insurance is limited because of lack of government's financial support and strict evaluation of buyer and exporter. Now Korea is ranked 10the largest trading country and therefore the exporters shall find another source for credit risk protection elsewhere. And as such this paper suggest International Factoring as a tool for the credit risk protection. The International Factoring gives advantages to the exporter in terms of credit protection and advances by purchasing account receivables on a without recourse basis.

• The Journal of Asian Finance, Economics and Business
• /
• v.9 no.5
• /
• pp.273-283
• /
• 2022

Banking and finance is a broad term that incorporates a variety of smaller, more specialized subjects such as corporate finance, tax finance, and insurance finance. A virtual assistant that assists users in searching for information about banking and finance terms might be an extremely beneficial tool for users. In this study, we explored the process of searching for information, seeking opportunities, and developing a virtual assistant in the first stages of starting learning and understanding Vietnamese to increase effectiveness and save time, which is also an innovative business practice in Use-case Vietnam. We built the FIBA2020 dataset and proposed a pipeline that used Natural Language Processing (NLP) inclusive of Natural Language Understanding (NLU) algorithms to build chatbot applications. The open-source framework RASA is used to implement the system in our study. We aim to improve our model performance by replacing parts of RASA's default tokenizers with Vietnamese tokenizers and experimenting with various language models. The best accuracy we achieved is 86.48% and 70.04% in the ideal condition and worst condition, respectively. Finally, we put our findings into practice by creating an Android virtual assistant application using the model trained using Whitespace tokenizer and the pre-trained language m-BERT.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• v.25 no.2
• /
• pp.152-177
• /
• 2021

Purpose - This study analyses the excepted requirement and burden of proof of the carrier due to unseaworthiness through comparison between the marine transport contract and marine insurance contract. Design/methodology - This study uses the legal analytical normative approach. The juridical approach involves reviewing and examining theories, concepts, legal doctrines and legislation that are related to the problems. In this study a literature analysis using academic literature and internet data is conducted. Findings - The burden of proof in case of seaworthiness should be based on presumed fault, not proved fault. The burden of proving unseaworthiness/seaworthiness should shift to the carrier, and should be exercised before seeking the protections of the law or carriage contract. In other words, the insurer cannot escape coverage for unfitness of a vessel which arises while the vessel is at sea, which the assured could not have prevented in the exercise of due diligence. The insurer bears the burden of proving unseaworthiness. The warranty of seaworthiness is implied in hull, but not protection and indemnity policies. The 2015 Act repeals ss. 33(3) and 34 of MIA 1906. Otherwise the provisions of the MIA 1906 remain in force, including the definition of a promissory warranty and the recognition of implied warranties. There is less clarity about the position when the source of the loss occurs before the breach of warranty but the actual loss is suffered after the breach. Nonetheless, by s.10(2) of the 2015 Act the insurer appears not to be liable for any loss occurring after the breach of warranty and before there has been a remedy. Originality/value - When unseaworthiness is identified after the sailing of the vessel, mere acceptance of the ship does not mean the party waives any claims for damages or the right to terminate the contract, provided that failure to comply with the contractual obligations is of critical importance. The burden of proof with regards to loss of damage to a cargo caused by unseaworthiness is regulated by the applicable law. For instance, under the common law, if the cargo claimant alleges that the loss or damage has been caused by unseaworthiness, then he has the burden of proof to establish the followings: (i) that the vessel was unseaworthy at the beginning of the voyage; and that, (ii) that the loss or damage has been caused by such unseaworthiness. In other words, if the warranty of seaworthiness at the inception of the voyage is breached, the breach voids the policy if the ship owner had prior knowledge of the unseaworthy condition. By contrast, knowingly permitting the vessel to break ground in an unseaworthy condition denies liability only for loss or damage proximately caused by the unseaworthiness. Such a breach does not, therefore, void the entire policy, but only serves to exonerate the insurer for loss or damage proximately caused by the unseaworthy condition.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.97-121
• /
• 2006

Inter-Korean exchanges using civil aviation has been continuing since the temporary direct air route from Pyongyang to Seoul was opened on June 15th, 2000 for the summit meeting with North Korea. In this paper, I analyze the North Korea Aviation law by focusing on the differences with South Korean Aviation law. While South Korean Aviation law is modeled on the Pandect system, North Korean Aviation law can only be understood by looking at North Korea's socialist ideology. Therefore, North Korean Aviation law has some expressions which can hardly be understood. With respect to the source of aviation law, both South and North Korea are in compliance with the Convention on International Civil Aviation (Signed at Chicago, on 7 December, 1944). Thus, they established the aviation law based on the standards and recommendations provided by ICAO. For this reason, they have similar legal systems and composition. From this analysis, a few differences are also derived regarding aircraft ownership, airports, airline liability, aircraft accident investigation organization and aviation insurance. It is important to note that this paper has a particular limitation. Not only is the information about North Korean law very limited, but North Korea also does not provide easy access to its national legal codes. This paper describes the legal comparison of South and North Korea by focusing on the formation and framework of North Korean aviation law.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.12 no.1
• /
• pp.133-173
• /
• 2011

Since mid-1960s the reports from the Surgeon General, the World Health Organization, and other health experts state that there is no risk-free level exposure to smoking and secondhand smoke. Tobacco smoke is made up of more than 7,000 chemicals. Hundreds are toxic, and at least 70 are carcinogens. The chemicals in tobacco smoke reach smoker's lungs quickly every time smoker inhale causing damages immediately. Inhaling even the smallest amount of tobacco smoke can also damage smoker's DNA, which can lead to cancers. Smoking is responsible for more than 87% of lung cancers, but there are a host of other chronic diseases directly related to exposure to tobacco smoke. It's also a major cause of heart disease, stroke, aortic aneurysm, peripheral arterial disease and most of the other diseases. In the United States, each year with more than from 440,000 to 520,000 deaths caused by smoking and exposure to involuntary smoke. They conclude that smoking is the single most important source of preventable morbidity and mortality. The United States of America have about 60-year history of tobacco litigation. Tobacco litigation has been an important tool in tobacco control strategies aimed at limiting the activities of tobacco companies and providing redress to people who have become ill as a result of their use of tobacco products. Tobacco litigation is a kind of tort litigation. Quite often, as in the asbestos and other mass tort litigation episodes, tobacco litigation can play an educational role, warning the public about the magnitude of health risks that might otherwise be less clearly perceived. Tobacco litigation allows smokers, their families or other victims of smoking to sue tobacco companies in order to be compensated for the harm they have suffered. Potential benefits of tobacco litigation include compensation for smoking-related damages, strengthening regulatory activity, publicity, documents disclosure and changing tobacco industry behavior. And also tobacco litigation can limit the political activities of tobacco industry, protect human rights of smokers and non-smokers, increase burden to tobacco price-up and enhance the effects of law and politics in public health.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.35-58
• /
• 2009

A treaty that governs the compensation on damage caused by aircraft to the third parties on surface was first adopted in Rome in 1933, but without support from the international aviation community it was replaced by another convention adopted again in Rome in 1952. Despite the increase of the compensation amount and some improvements to the old version, the Rome Convention 1952 with 49 State parties as of today is not considered universally accepted. Neither is the Montreal Protocol 1978 amending the Rome Convention 1952, with only 12 State parties excluding major aviation powers like USA, Japan, UK, and Germany. Consequently, it is mostly the local laws that apply to the compensation case of surface damage caused by the aircraft, contrary to the intention of those countries and people who involved themselves in the drafting of the early conventions on surface damage. The terrorist attacks 9/11 proved that even the strongest power in the world like the USA cannot with ease bear all the damages done to the third parties by the terrorist acts involving aircraft. Accordingly as a matter of urgency, the International Civil Aviation Organization(ICAO) picked up the matter and have it considered among member States for a few years through its Legal Committee before proposing for adoption as a new treaty in the Diplomatic Conference held in Montreal, Canada 20 April to 2 May 2009. Accordingly, two treaties based on the drafts of the Legal Committee were adopted in Montreal by consensus, one on the compensation for general risk damage caused by aircraft, the other one on compensation for damage from acts of unlawful interference involving aircraft. Both Conventions improved the old Convention/Protocol in many aspects. Deleting 'surface' in defining the damage to the third parties in the title and contents of the Conventions is the first improvement because the third party damage is not necessarily limited to surface on the soil and sea of the Earth. Thus Mid-air collision is now the new scope of application. Increasing compensation limit in big gallop is another improvement, so is the inclusion of the mental injury accompanied by bodily injury as the damage to be compensated. In fact, jurisprudence in recent years for cases of passengers in aircraft accident holds aircraft operators to be liable to such mental injuries. However, "Terror Convention" involving unlawful interference of aircraft has some unique provisions of innovation and others. While establishing the International Civil Aviation Compensation Fund to supplement, when necessary, the damages that exceed the limit to be covered by aircraft operators through insurance taking is an innovation, leaving the fate of the Convention to a State Party, implying in fact the USA, is harming its universality. Furthermore, taking into account the fact that the damage incurred by the terrorist acts, where ever it takes place targeting whichever sector or industry, are the domain of the State responsibility, imposing the burden of compensation resulting from terrorist acts in the air industry on the aircraft operators and passengers/shippers is a source of serious concern for the prospect of the Convention. This is more so when the risks of terrorist acts normally aimed at a few countries because of current international political situation are spread out to many innocent countries without quid pro quo.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.9
• /
• pp.85-143
• /
• 1997

The main purpose of the investigation of an accident caused by aircraft is to be prevented the sudden and casual accidents caused by wilful misconduct and fault from pilots, air traffic controllers, hijack, trouble of engine and machinery of aircraft, turbulence during the bad weather, collision between birds and aircraft, near miss flight by aircrafts etc. It is not the purpose of this activity to apportion blame or liability for offender of aircraft accidents. Accidents to aircraft, especially those involving the general public and their property, are a matter of great concern to the aviation community. The system of international regulation exists to improve safety and minimize, as far as possible, the risk of accidents but when they do occur there is a web of systems and procedures to investigate and respond to them. I would like to trace the general line of regulation from an international source in the Chicago Convention of 1944. Article 26 of the Convention lays down the basic principle for the investigation of the aircraft accident. Where there has been an accident to an aircraft of a contracting state which occurs in the territory of another contracting state and which involves death or serious injury or indicates serious technical defect in the aircraft or air navigation facilities, the state in which the accident occurs must institute an inquiry into the circumstances of the accident. That inquiry will be in accordance, in so far as its law permits, with the procedure which may be recommended from time to time by the International Civil Aviation Organization ICAO). There are very general provisions but they state two essential principles: first, in certain circumstances there must be an investigation, and second, who is to be responsible for undertaking that investigation. The latter is an important point to establish otherwise there could be at least two states claiming jurisdiction on the inquiry. The Chicago Convention also provides that the state where the aircraft is registered is to be given the opportunity to appoint observers to be present at the inquiry and the state holding the inquiry must communicate the report and findings in the matter to that other state. It is worth noting that the Chicago Convention (Article 25) also makes provision for assisting aircraft in distress. Each contracting state undertakes to provide such measures of assistance to aircraft in distress in its territory as it may find practicable and to permit (subject to control by its own authorities) the owner of the aircraft or authorities of the state in which the aircraft is registered, to provide such measures of assistance as may be necessitated by circumstances. Significantly, the undertaking can only be given by contracting state but the duty to provide assistance is not limited to aircraft registered in another contracting state, but presumably any aircraft in distress in the territory of the contracting state. Finally, the Convention envisages further regulations (normally to be produced under the auspices of ICAO). In this case the Convention provides that each contracting state, when undertaking a search for missing aircraft, will collaborate in co-ordinated measures which may be recommended from time to time pursuant to the Convention. Since 1944 further international regulations relating to safety and investigation of accidents have been made, both pursuant to Chicago Convention and, in particular, through the vehicle of the ICAO which has, for example, set up an accident and reporting system. By requiring the reporting of certain accidents and incidents it is building up an information service for the benefit of member states. However, Chicago Convention provides that each contracting state undertakes collaborate in securing the highest practicable degree of uniformity in regulations, standards, procedures and organization in relation to aircraft, personnel, airways and auxiliary services in all matters in which such uniformity will facilitate and improve air navigation. To this end, ICAO is to adopt and amend from time to time, as may be necessary, international standards and recommended practices and procedures dealing with, among other things, aircraft in distress and investigation of accidents. Standards and Recommended Practices for Aircraft Accident Injuries were first adopted by the ICAO Council on 11 April 1951 pursuant to Article 37 of the Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation and were designated as Annex 13 to the Convention. The Standards Recommended Practices were based on Recommendations of the Accident Investigation Division at its first Session in February 1946 which were further developed at the Second Session of the Division in February 1947. The 2nd Edition (1966), 3rd Edition, (1973), 4th Edition (1976), 5th Edition (1979), 6th Edition (1981), 7th Edition (1988), 8th Edition (1992) of the Annex 13 (Aircraft Accident and Incident Investigation) of the Chicago Convention was amended eight times by the ICAO Council since 1966. Annex 13 sets out in detail the international standards and recommended practices to be adopted by contracting states in dealing with a serious accident to an aircraft of a contracting state occurring in the territory of another contracting state, known as the state of occurrence. It provides, principally, that the state in which the aircraft is registered is to be given the opportunity to appoint an accredited representative to be present at the inquiry conducted by the state in which the serious aircraft accident occurs. Article 26 of the Chicago Convention does not indicate what the accredited representative is to do but Annex 13 amplifies his rights and duties. In particular, the accredited representative participates in the inquiry by visiting the scene of the accident, examining the wreckage, questioning witnesses, having full access to all relevant evidence, receiving copies of all pertinent documents and making submissions in respect of the various elements of the inquiry. The main shortcomings of the present system for aircraft accident investigation are that some contracting sates are not applying Annex 13 within its express terms, although they are contracting states. Further, and much more important in practice, there are many countries which apply the letter of Annex 13 in such a way as to sterilise its spirit. This appears to be due to a number of causes often found in combination. Firstly, the requirements of the local law and of the local procedures are interpreted and applied so as preclude a more efficient investigation under Annex 13 in favour of a legalistic and sterile interpretation of its terms. Sometimes this results from a distrust of the motives of persons and bodies wishing to participate or from commercial or related to matters of liability and bodies. These may be political, commercial or related to matters of liability and insurance. Secondly, there is said to be a conscious desire to conduct the investigation in some contracting states in such a way as to absolve from any possibility of blame the authorities or nationals, whether manufacturers, operators or air traffic controllers, of the country in which the inquiry is held. The EEC has also had an input into accidents and investigations. In particular, a directive was issued in December 1980 encouraging the uniformity of standards within the EEC by means of joint co-operation of accident investigation. The sharing of and assisting with technical facilities and information was considered an important means of achieving these goals. It has since been proposed that a European accident investigation committee should be set up by the EEC (Council Directive 80/1266 of 1 December 1980). After I would like to introduce the summary of the legislation examples and system for aircraft accidents investigation of the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, The Netherlands, Sweden, Swiss, New Zealand and Japan, and I am going to mention the present system, regulations and aviation act for the aircraft accident investigation in Korea. Furthermore I would like to point out the shortcomings of the present system and regulations and aviation act for the aircraft accident investigation and then I will suggest my personal opinion on the new and dramatic innovation on the system for aircraft accident investigation in Korea. I propose that it is necessary and desirable for us to make a new legislation or to revise the existing aviation act in order to establish the standing and independent Committee of Aircraft Accident Investigation under the Korean Government.