• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.37-54
• /
• 2013

This article focuses on integrating institutional mediation systems, especially the analysis of the leading ADR operation. Mediation is a process in which an impartial third party, a mediator, facilitates the resolution of a dispute by promoting voluntary agreements by the parties to the dispute. A mediator facilitates communications, promotes understanding, focuses the parties on their interests, and seeks agreement. These standards give meaning to this definition of mediation. Standard mediation clauses are construed as broadly as possible, and mediation is compelled unless it may be said with positive assurance that the mediation process is not susceptible to an interpretation that covers the asserted dispute. Performing the conflicts check early in the process helps in eliminating any awkwardness or delays caused by making disclosures after mediation commences. Mediator impartiality is central to the mediation process. A mediator should mediate only those matters in which she or he can remain impartial and evenhanded. If at any time the mediator is unable to conduct the process in an impartial manner, the mediator is obligated to withdraw.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.32 no.4
• /
• pp.87-101
• /
• 2022

Since Research and Development has been expanded by government, It is very important to evaluate the outcome of Research and Development. Government have levied the penalty of researchers who misused research funding as time goes on. However, there is no protect law for the research before 2021. Government put new committee for the researchers to judge whether their action is legal or illegal based of Innovation Act 2021. Due to the various outcome index of research and development, many firms which is paticipating the research and development have been confused the outcome index. Also, It is difficult for government agencies for management to evaluate the outcome. Even if the committee is trying to solve dispute between researchers and the government agencies, it is not enough to solve it. Therefore, we need to consider Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR), because the ADR has been developved detail skills for long time.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.165-190
• /
• 2013

As intellectual property rights are perceived as the key element of creating added values and securing competitiveness, the result of intellectual property rights disputes play an important role in the success of companies. As seen from above strong points of an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system in Chapter III, intellectual property rights disputes increasingly tend to be resolved by ADR rather than litigation. Discussions about and operation of ADR are already being actively carried out in many countries, and major ADR institutions have been acquiring experience in a variety of intellectual property rights disputes. To enhance the use and recognition of ADR as the way of resolving the Intellectual Property Rights disputes in Korea, this study suggested the following three ways. First, domestic ADR institutions, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB) will need to establish cooperative systems with prominent overseas institutions to lead the disputing parties to fair resolutions as well as to instill trust in international arbitration institutions. Second, they will need to contribute to the promotion of arbitration systems throughout society by developing and applying a variety of arbitration systems as well as securing a pool of professionals. Finally, the arbitration rules will need to be continuously improved to deal with disputes promptly and reinforce privacy protection.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.16 no.2
• /
• pp.183-211
• /
• 2006

DDA and FTA make global business environments more competitive. These environments require Korean firms to face an unlimited competition and to resolve their dispute by ADR(Alternative Dispute Resolution). Thus, Korean Companies should be more concerned with ADR system and should utilize ADR to settle their dispute effectively and efficiently. However, ADR and KCAB isn't well recognized in Korea. So, the major purposes of this study are to expand the recognition of ADR and KCAB through SWOT Analysis of KCAB in Korea. Based on the results of my study, I suggest KCAB the following guidelines. First, KCAB work closely with the concerned research association as KSSA to make a guideline books of efficient dispute resolution. Second, KCAB improves their service quality and tries to utilizes various opportunity factors well. Meanwhile, Korean government assists KCAB with funds as well as improvement of dispute resolution system as the establishment of ADR Law. Consequently, to expand ADR in Korea, revolution of KCAB Staffs' consciousness and Korean government's assistance are very needed.

• Journal of the Korea Society of Computer and Information
• /
• v.25 no.5
• /
• pp.209-216
• /
• 2020

As depository system for negotiation or reimbursement to the victim in criminal case is reflected to consideration for diminishing punishment and hence, it is very important in the process. According to the current law, one needs to fill out victim's personal information such as name, address, and ID number for processing depository. However, if the victim is sexual violence victim, all the personal information is covered up becoming anonymous. Therefore, it becomes difficult for the accused person to get necessary information. Such covering up action is to prevent further second damage that may be caused such as threatening for the negotiation whereas victim has no willingness to forgive the accused. However, even if the accused person regrets his/her crime and make reimbursement to the victim, as they have no personal information on the victim it becomes impossible for them to make the depository. If we apply ESCROW system here it will allow victims to avoid any direct contact with the accused person as well as preventing any privacy disclosure. Also, for the accuse person, they can show how much they regret by making depository within their capability.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.87-107
• /
• 2011

There are two methods to resolve conflicts related to constructions which are through lawsuits and ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) just like any other conflicts. Along with the special characteristics pertaining to the conflicts related to constructions, the advantages that ADR is in possession of such as its cost, duration and professionalism, resolving conflicts through ADR has been considered to be more logical than any other options recently. In Korea's case at present, the resolution of conflicts regarding constructions through ADR is mostly dependent on administrative mediation or through arbitration. However, in the case of the administrative mediation, its usage rate is very low due to problems caused by problems in its running and effectiveness. In the case of arbitration, the services of the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board is comparatively used more but because of the fact that arbitration relies on a single trial system and the fact that its executive powers while having the same effectiveness as the final ruling does not get acknowledged leads to the phenomena of avoiding its usage. In addition, in relation to the selective arbitration clause, the problem of effectiveness of the arbitrative agreement is becoming a hindrance to the activation and promotion of the arbitration process. Furthermore, in the case where the ordering body is the government, the public servant involved in the case avoiding the arbitration process because of concerns of being penalized by the internal and external audit within the institution is becoming a problem as well. These problems are not only limited to conflicts regarding constructions and there needs to be actions taken to promote the activation of ADR by enacting a basic law. The more important issue at hand however is offering a resolution measure that would be the most appropriate for users and this could probably be done only through actions such as implementing the American partnering system or the dispute adjudication board system so that they can supervise the resolution of conflicts through mediation, arbitration, and assistance as well as offering consultations regarding conflicts related to constructions.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.3-25
• /
• 2005

The companies' management strategies of the electronic commerce market are different from those of the traditional market. The main difference between the electronic commerce market and the traditional market is an IT network system which is a companies' management strategies in the electronic commerce market. This study focuses on the examination and analysis of the companies' management strategies which are constituted through influence on the effectiveness of the IT network system in the electronic commerce market and Promoting Arbitration System in The Era of Digital Economy this study is to introduce several alternative policies of the Government and companies to such formated IT network system of the electronic commerce market in the future. It's also suggested that the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB) fully cover consideration and arbitration, while KCAB for Electronic Commerce activates its proper role of consulting and ad hoc arbitration by using electronic information. E-commerce sets up the probability that its merchants and customers will not exist in the same legal jurisdictions. The confusing application of laws and wide geographical dispersion of these parties will necessitate a faster and cheaper dispute resolution methodology. Therefore, online ADR may be effective for e-commerce dispute resolution. The examples of online ADR operation are the cyber mediation of Electronic Transaction Dispute Resolution Committee, the cyber mediation of Korean Commercial Arbitration Board, the cyber mediation of Click N Settle, the online ADR of BBB online, and the cyber arbitration of virtual Magistrate. The paper points out the last one as the most desired practice. This study results are how to minimize the disputes and the method of dispute settlement. Therefore, a role of arbitration proposed and emphasized. To protect the dispute in advance, it's suggested to revise rules timely following on technical changes, and emphasized that the dispute has to lead to arbitration settlement not for consuming unnecessary time and finance for enterprises and consumers.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.22 no.2
• /
• pp.3-29
• /
• 2012

The Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) Act in Japan was proclaimed on December 1, 2004, and five years have passed since the act took effect on April 1, 2007. The ADR Act enables qualified dispute resolution businesses to be certified as ADR business holders through the government's accreditation system, contributing greatly to the advancement of a private ADR. As of June 2012, the number of ADR institutes certified by the government had increased to 112. Article 2 of the supplementary provisions of Japan's ADR Act provides as follows: "The government should review the progress of the Act five years after enforcement, and take measures, if recognized as necessary, based on the results." Any problems revealed in the process of implementing the act are expected to be revised after five years of enforcement. To this end, the academic circle established an association called the Arbitration ADR Act Society in 2004, considering issues of the ADR Act and measures to improve the legislation, making policy suggestions, and working to improve management of the act, through seminars, forums, and a journal. The Japanese ADR Association, composed of ADR institutions as members, put forward a proposal entitled "Toward the Revision of the ADR Act" to the Ministry of Justice on April 2, 2012. This paper intends to identify the current state of the accreditation system, one of the most important systems under the ADR Act in Japan, in consideration of ADR Act revision. In particular, the examination includes measures to improve the accreditation system as well as data analysis of the application of accreditation, the current state of accredited institutions, and the ADR performance of accredited ADR businesses. In Korea, an ADR act has not been legislated yet, although the issue is being actively considered. This paper will be a meaningful reference for the Korean government in developing an accreditation system for inclusion in its ADR act in the future.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.3
• /
• pp.89-114
• /
• 2011

Environmental disputes not only possess the special characteristics of collectivity and plural value relativity but it also possesses the unique features of difficulty to prove cause and effect as well as the structural maldistribution of evidence and information. Therefore, the positive resolution of an environmental dispute can be brought about more easily with the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) which can take the form of talks, compromises, as well as arbitration or mediation rather than through a trial process. Such being the case, this paper first looks into the problems and effectiveness of the arbitration system of environmental lawsuits and then takes an even closer look at Korea's environmental dispute arbitration system and finally offer some reform methods. In Korea, the environmental dispute arbitration system was implemented in 1991 and has been executed since then. Although this system does have positive features such as the high rate of coming to an agreement between the involved parties but unfortunately, most of the cases rely on decisions based on right and wrong which cannot but be far away from the intentions of the ADR system. It is heavily centered around claims regarding psychological compensation regarding noise and vibrations and the ratio of the actual amount of compensation is comparatively lower than the requested amount. In addition, with the limits in organization and manpower, it leads to a lack of professionalism as well as the problem of low usage with the low awareness rate. As reform measures against the aforementioned problems, this paper suggests the following. First, in order to activate the arbitration process more fully, it proposes aggressive usage of compulsory arbitration as well as submission to arbitration, while at the same time raising ADR professionals to fill in the missing gaps. Secondly, in order to overcome the problem of concentration of related cases, making representative lawsuits of environmental organizations would be a good idea. It also states that in order to make the compensation amount more realistic, it should go out of the across-the-board decision making process and reach a decision about the compensation amount that takes the individual situation's dispute into consideration. In order to boost the professionalism of the environmental dispute arbitration, it is necessary to reform the organization and manpower such as expanding the number of members of full standing, and increasing the professionalism of the examiners. Also, to increase the usage rate of the ADR system, the paper suggests stationing a civilian consultant regarding environment, or activating the compulsory arbitration which is the premise for public participation on the part of the residents.