• Proceedings of the Korean Institute of Navigation and Port Research Conference
• /
• 2010.10a
• /
• pp.167-169
• /
• 2010

해상교통관제제도는 공무원인 해상교통관제요원에 의해서 통제되는데 실효성을 확보하기 위해서 공권력이 투입되는 과정에서 선박소유자에게 손해를 입혔을 경우 구제수단으로서 국가배상법의 적용여부를 살펴볼 것이다. 해상교통관제의 경우 공무원이 과실이나 부주의로 인한 선박이 충돌 좌초 등의 사고가 발생하였을 때 국가배상법 제2조 공무원의 위법한 직무행위로 인한 손해배상에서 국가배상이 성립하기 위한 요건이 충족되는지 확인한다. 해상교통관제관련 손해배상을 국가배상보다는 전문적인 해사행정법 체계내에 특별법 규정을 둔다면 포괄적이고 추상적인 국가배상법의 요건에 의한 적용보다는 전문적이고 특수한 상황에 적합하여 진일보하는 계기가 될 것이다.

• Proceedings of the Korea Contents Association Conference
• /
• 2006.05a
• /
• pp.322-326
• /
• 2006

There are the road of the artificial government property and rivers of the natural government property in representative Public Facilities applied National Reimbursement Law. Art.5. Doctrine on Responsibility of Public Facilities. Recently damage of a people has frequently been occurring caused by the flood of rivers and the flood disaster, and a people tends to request national reimbursement regarded it not as a natural disaster but as a man-made disaster. Especially the flood repeatedly occurred by the flood of rivers and destructive of the embankment of rivers, and it is also occurring in repairing rivers. Therefore a nation have to take responsibility of compensation for damage because of defect of conservation of rivers, and pay attention to improving the facilities of conservation and at the same time expand the range of responsibility. Thus the range of this study limits the national reimbursement of conservation of rivers among National Reimbursement Law. Art.5. Compensation for Damages on Defect about an Establishment and Management of public Facilities. Within this range, the objection of this study is to seek controversial issues and solutions, which belong with national reimbursement responsibility about conservation of rivers, as every principle of law and precedent coming under natural government property about compensation for damages caused by defect of conservation of rivers is analyzed and examined.

• Journal of Digital Convergence
• /
• v.14 no.6
• /
• pp.51-60
• /
• 2016

The modern state has always followed a variety of risks in the industrialization and informatization trends in the development of science and technology. Under such an environment, A matter of State compensation should take into consideration a variety of values such as harmony relief victims' rights in accordance with the principles of the rule of law, suppression of illegal acts of public servants, ensuring stable performance of official duties, the national treasury stability. As the state takes responsibility for an act of a public servant in a modern constitutional state, there may be a doubt on that the state takes responsibility only when there is a deliberation or a mistake. According to the theory of the self-responsibility, which suits the Constitution, the principle of liability with mistake on the State Compensation Law shall be excluded. I agree to the opinion that a subjective responsibility prerequisite such as a deliberation or a mistake is not required in relation to the liability of reparation on the State Compensation Law. Therefore, it is needed to convert the principle of state liability of reparation from the principle of liability with mistake to the principle of liability without mistake through a fundamental revision of the State Compensation Law.

• Product Safety
• /
• s.100
• /
• pp.43-45
• /
• 2002

미국은 우리나라의 최대 수출시장으로 국내의 제조업체들이 미국내에서의 PL소송을 통해 막대한 배상송실을 초래하여 값비싼 경험을 한바 있다. 미국의 제조물책임법은 여타국가에서는 찾아볼 수없는 특수한 성격을 지니고 있다. 첫째 예상밖의 소송(Frivolous Suits)을 들 수 있다. 둘째, 연대책임과 이와 관련된 디피포켓이론(Deep Pocket Theory)이다. 셋째 징벌적 배상(Punitive Damages)인데, 앞날을 경계하는 뜻으로 벌을 준다는

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.35 no.3
• /
• pp.3-37
• /
• 2020

The aircraft crew operating on international routes performs almost identical tasks as police officials in terms of dealing with the unlawful interference in the aircraft. This means that the liability question which is related to the law enforcement by the police officer may arise regarding the crew's performance of his or her duties. With regard to the carrier's liability due to the crew's unlawful action, there are distinctive characteristics from the liability due to police officers' unlawful action. In case of the claim for damages by the crew's unlawful action, the first question should be whether such action complies with the requirements under the Tokyo Convention 1963. If such action does not conform with the Tokyo Convention 1963, we should examine that claim under the State Compensation Act, the Montreal Convention 1999, and the Civil Act of Korea. The examination under the Tokyo Convention 1963 is not so different from the Korean Court's precedents. However, the court should consider the characteristics of the environment surrounding the crew. The action which is not indemnified under the Tokyo Convention 1963 should be examined under the tort laws. Because the aircraft crew is private persons entrusted with public duties under Korean Law, the State Compensation Act may apply. However, further studies regarding the harmonious interpretation with the Montreal Convention 1999 is needed. With regard to the carrier's liability, the Montreal Convention of 1999 should be applied to the crew's unlawful actions onboard. This is because the Montreal Convention of 1999 preempts the national law for the events that occurred during transportation, and there is no provision which excludes such unlawful actions from the scope of its application. On the other hand, the national law, such as the Civil Act of Korea, applies to unlawful actions taken after transportation. This is because the interpretation that infinitely expands the scope of the Montreal Convention 1999 should not be allowed. Given the foregoing, the standard of the claim for damages due to the crew's unlawful action varies depending on the place where the specific action was taken. As a result, the type of damage recoverable and the burden of proof also varies accordingly. Carriers and crew members must perform their duties with this in mind, but in particular, they should observe the proportionality, and when interpreting the law, it is necessary for the court or lawyer to consider the special characteristics of the work environment.

• Korean small business review
• /
• v.42 no.1
• /
• pp.19-41
• /
• 2020

In Korea, punitive damages were introduced in the 2011 Fair Transactions in Subcontracting Act(FTSA), and in 2019 the Patent Act, Trade Secret Protection Act(TSPA), Industrial Technology Protection Act(ITPA), and Mutually Beneficial Cooperation Act(MBCA). In punitive damages, the judgment of 'intentional' is especially important, and it is necessary to refer to US precedents since there is no accumulated case. Major Company can avoid intentional counseling through the advice of lawyers, but SMEs may have to punish punitive damages due to a lack of awareness of the system. In the case of TSPA, ITPA, FTSA, and MBCA, except for Patent Act, the provisions related to proof of damage have not been well maintained yet. Therefore, the data submission order system of these laws needs to be revised to the level of patent Act need to be. TSPA needs to be amended in the future to estimate the amount of the royalties in estimating the amount of damages so that it can receive the 'reasonably' estimated amount rather than the usual amount. On the other hand, ITPA, FTSA, and MBCA do not have any provisions for the estimation of damages. Besides, it is difficult to evaluate the technology value in the case of leakage or deodorization of new technologies. Therefore, valuation needs to be carried out by a credible institution along with the development of a model for calculating damages.

• Proceedings of the Korean Institute Of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• autumn
• /
• pp.23-30
• /
• 2001

The Financial Cost in construction industry today is tend to increasing the burden of business management on account of lowered profit due to the mege-competition and decreasing investment of construction, multi-interfacing. system in it's attribute and various unreasonable governeing enactments. It is becoming the most important aspects for the management of construction business on how to preserve the profit from the various risks. The ultimate aims of this study is to pursue the contractual equity between the parties by establishing the fundamentals of framework for the compensation of Financial Charges through the review of the precedent studies and analysis of inquiries. As a result of the study, improvable measures for any practical inequality and/or institutional defects of current public contract system in recovering the Financial Cost incurred to Contractor are delivered as below; (1) $\lceil$Working Rules for Construction Industry Accounting Standards$\rfloor$ shall be amended and supplemented so as the incurred interest to be recognized as an operative cost by live return over the collection period. (2) The long-term phase contract system of which is enforcing contractor to bear the certain losses shall be diminished and/or abolished gradually. (3) The unreasonable legislations on compensation for financial cost in contract conditions shall be improved in response to practical circumstances. (4) The use of Critical-Path Method for Time Management shall be activated together with EVMS. (5) Independent application of Contract Enactments for construction industry shall be adopted.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2017.11a
• /
• pp.201-201
• /
• 2017

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.67-100
• /
• 2017

Throughout the history of the aviation industry, from its origins in the $20^{th}$century to the present, accidents have always occurred. This paper deals with the legal liability of air traffic controllers, who represent one of the human factors causing these accidents. Though controller negligence turns out to be a main cause of the accident, Korea does not have additional judical case, since it was firstly declared that controller negligence was accountable for the air traffic accident in 1971. As such, we examine the liability of air traffic controllers as public officers. This paper looks not only at the role of air traffic controllers and pilots in accidents, but also at the applicability of controller liability in the context of Korean law. We determine that despite the high-stress environment, air traffic controllers must share in the responsibility to provide safe air navigation. Therefore, they cannot avoid legal liability.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.169-189
• /
• 2006

In 2007, KSLV(Korea Small Launching Vehicle) that we made at Goheung National Space Center is going to launch and promotes of our space exploration systematically and 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' was enter into force. 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' article 3, section 1, as is prescribing "Korean government keeps the space treaties contracted with other countries and international organizations and pursues after peaceful uses of outer space." The representative international treaties are Outer Space Treaty (1967) and Liability Convention (1972) etc. In Liability convention article 2, "A launching State shall be absolutely liable to pay compensation for damage caused by its space object on the surface of the earth or to aircraft in flight. The important content of the art. 2 is the responsible entity is the 'State' not the 'Company'. According by Korean Space Exploration Act art. 14, person who launches space objects according to art. 8 and art. 11 must bear the liability for damages owing to space accidents of the space objects. Could Korean government apply the Products Liability Act which is enter into force from July 1, 2002 to space launching person? And what is the contact type between Korea Aerospace Research Institute(KARl) and Russia manufacturer. Is that a Co-Development contract or Licence Product contract? And there is no exemption clause to waive the Russia manufacturer's liability which we could find it from other similar contract condition. If there is no exemption clause to the Russia manufacturer, could we apply the Korean Products Liability Act to Russia one? The most important legal point is whether we could apply the Korean Products Liability Act to the main component company. According by the art. 17 of the contract between KARl and the company, KARl already apply the Products Liability Act to the main component company. For reference, we need to examine the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, this case is that long distance electricity communication satellite of Western Union Telegraph company possessions fails on track entry. In Western Union's insurance company supplied to Western Union with insurance of $ 105 millions, which has the satellite regard as entirely damage. Five insurance companies -Appalachian insurance company, Commonwealth insurance company, Industrial Indemnity, Mutual Marine Office, Northbrook Excess & Surplus insurance company- went to court against McDonnell Douglases, Morton Thiokol and Hitco company to inquire for fault and strict liability of product. By the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, KARl should waiver the main component's product liability burden. And we could study the possibility of the adapt 'Government Contractor Defense' theory to the main component company.