• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제22권2호
• /
• 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.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제20권
• /
• pp.343-365
• /
• 2003

Dispute plays a key role in maintaining the desirable performance of trade transaction. In an effort to stay competitive in a global marketplace, the Korean companies need to become more aware of alternatives to costly and time-consuming litigation. Korean companies, therefore, should be more concerned with ADR(Alternative Dispute Resolution) system and should utilize ADR to settle their disputes effectively and efficiently. ADR encompasses all process of dispute resolution as a substitute for the traditional litigation. Generally, three kinds of ADR are available in Korea: Negotiation, mediation, and arbitration. This article investigates reasons why ADR isn't used well in Korea and suggests ways how ADR can work best in international trade disputes. To expand ADR system in international trade disputes, it is very important for both the company and the scholar to recognize the concept and usefulness of ADR system. The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board also must help both Korean companies and scholars recognize the mechanism of dispute resolution and utilize ADR system in international trade disputes.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제17권1호
• /
• pp.97-116
• /
• 2007

This article has the objective of studying French ADR System which is unique and peculiar in the world. Nowadays commercial conflict is resolved by litigation or ADR. ADR plays an important part in resolving commercial conflict in the US, England, Germany, Japan and France. Untill now, only French ADR System has not been studied at all in Korea. So we can safely say that it is necessary to research into French ADR System in order to improve Korea's ADR System. This study is composed of Introduction, Concept of French ADR System, Actual Circumstances of French ADR System and Conclusion. The Fundamental system of French ADR is the law of February 8, 1995 that is made up of 82 articles. Among these articles, Judical Conciliation and Mediation are the most important. It is universally admitted by most of legal scholars that judicial conciliation and mediation have the character of contract. Because mutual consent is necessary in order for judicial conciliation and mediation to be effective. French system of judicial conciliation and mediation is provided in French Civil Procedure Law. Judicial conciliation plays an important role in Labor Law and Family Law. In the early part of litigation, the attempt of consiliation can be made very frequently in France. Successful conciliation and mediation are induced into negociation between parties. Arbitration has its long history in Europe. In the medieval times, Western European merchant began to use Arbitration System. After the medieval times had passed, Arbitration System took root in France. But Arbitration System has not so developed in France. On the other hand, Arbitration System has developed to a considerable degree in the US in spite of its short history. It is due to the fact that the French dislike to have recourse to litigation as compared with the Americans. However Arbitration can resolve securities conflict through various institutions in France, which is very similar to the concerned US phenomenon.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제20권3호
• /
• pp.121-145
• /
• 2010

In the past, ADR has not been used as frequently in Japan as it has in other parts of the industrialized world. However, though litigation is still the most utilized vehicle of dispute resolution by Japanese financial institutions, this will be changing. The New Financial ADR system, which was created by a June 2009 amendment to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, is meant to deal with every stage of financial-related disputes and, as such, strives to resolve disputes before they become significant and acts to ameliorate any post-ADR issues that may remain, thereby completing the FIEA's purpose to protect investors. Since the foundation of the New Financial ADR system applies to all related industries, new provisions were set out in 16 business related acts, such as the Banking Act, the Insurance Business Act, and FIEA itself. October 2010 will mark the formal introduction of a new system of financial ADR in Japan. New Financial ADR in Japan will be modeled on the Financial Ombudsman Service in the United Kingdom, but will not feature one comprehensive dispute resolution system in which one dispute resolution institution covers all disputes in the financial field. The New Financial ADR system is merely one step towards a foundation of comprehensive financial ADR such as FOS. It must be noted, however, that this all important first step was over seven years in the making, involving a great deal of discussion, debate, and compromise amongst many parts of Japanese government, business, and society. The New Financial ADR system grants participating parties the ability to stop the clock on any statute of limitations which may correspond to any future possible court cases related to the dispute,13 and further grants the ability to suspend related court proceedings while the parties are utilizing the New Financial ADR system. In addition, where financial institutions have not accepted dispute resolution proceedings or have not accepted a special conciliation proposal, the Ministry of Finance may issue an order compelling compliance if it is found that certain actions are necessary to ensure the appropriate operations of a financial institution's business. In Japan, as best practices have not yet been created.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제18권3호
• /
• pp.91-116
• /
• 2008

E-Commerce constitutes an important part of all commercial activities. Online Alternative Dispute Resolution(Online ADR) or Online Dispute Resolution(ODR) is a new method of dispute, resolution which, is provided online. Most Online ADR services are alternatives to litigation. In this respect, they are the online transposition of the methods developed in the ADR movement such as negotiation, mediation and arbitration. But there are also online courts which are really normal courts in which the contesting parties communicate essentially online. This paper deals with the current operation of Online ADR and the ways to, activate it. They include (1) die establishment of legal stability regarding Online ADR, (2) the enhancement of system security in providing Online ADR services, (3) the introduction of Online ADR service platform for providing the various services through single window on a national, or global basis, and (4) the introduction of Online ADR online monitoring system for systematic dispute resolution services.

• 법제연구
• /
• 제44호
• /
• pp.343-386
• /
• 2013

우리나라의 금융ADR제도는 금융감독당국인 금융감독원 및 그 안에 설치되는 금융분쟁조정위원회가 제도운영의 주체가 되는 이른바 "금융분쟁조정제도"로 대표된다고 할 수 있고, 이를 흔히 "행정형 금융ADR제도"라고 평가하고 있다. 이 제도는 금융위원회설치법(1997)에 의해 1999년경에 도입되어 10여년에 걸친 제도운영의 성과를 축적하여 현재에 이르고 있다. 그런데 정작 우리나라에서 금융ADR제도가 주목받기 시작한 것은 대체로 2008년의 이른바 금융위기 이후에 금융소비자보호가 강조되기 시작하면서이다. 금융거래를 통하여 피해를 입은 금융소비자를 보호하기 위한 제도적 방안의 하나로 "소송외적 분쟁해결제도(이른바 ADR)"에 대한 관심이 높아졌기 때문이다. 그나마 우리나라 금융ADR제도에 관한 논의는 주로 감독체제 개편과 관련하여 금융ADR기관의 운영주체를 누구로 할 것인가에 집중되었다는 점에 특이성이 있고, 우리 금융ADR제도의 특징을 객관적인 입장에서 면밀하게 분석한 위에 제도개선의 방향성을 제시하는 논의는 충분하게 이루어졌다고 할 수 없다. 본고는 이와 같은 점들을 문제의식으로 하여 우리나라의 금융ADR제도의 특징을 분석하여 하나의 제도모델로 구체화하고, 이를 통하여 제도의 문제점을 분명히 하고 그 개선방향을 제시하고자 하였다. 우리나라 금융ADR제도는 "행정형 통합형 합의형+집행력 부여형(준사법형) IDR비전치형(ADR기관내 합의권고형)"의 특징을 갖는 제도모델로 평가할 수 있다. 그러나 준사법형 효력모델을 채택하면서도 제도의 실효성확보를 위한 제도적 기반을 갖추지 못하고 있고, 통합형 ADR기관의 제도운영의 부담이 크다는 두 가지 문제점을 극복하여야 하는 과제를 동시에 안고 있다. 그러한 관점에서 본고는 현행 제도의 실효성 확보와 업계자율형 ADR제도(특히 IDR전치형 제도)의 확충을 위한 개선방안을 제시하였다. 특히 제도의 실효성확보 방안으로서 조정안에 편면적 구속력을 부여하지 않고도 조정성립율을 높일 수 있는 방안이 제도개선으로서는 최선책이라는 전제 하에 내부의 인원확충을 도모하고 조정절차 및 효력을 차등화하는 방안, 금융기관이 조정절차 중에 소송으로 도피하는 문제점을 해결하기 위하여 피신청인인 금융기관은 합의권고 또는 조정안을 제시받기 전에는 소를 제기하지 못하도록 규제하는 방안, 소송과의 연계제도로서 소송절차의 중지제도 외에 시효중단효를 부여하는 방안을 각각 제시하였다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제16권2호
• /
• 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.

• 보건행정학회지
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.164-171
• /
• 2014

Background: Safety of drugs has become a major issue in public healthcare. Spontaneous reporting of adverse drug reaction (ADR) is the cornerstone in management of drug safety. We aimed to investigate the awareness and knowledge of spontaneous ADR reporting in general public of Korea. Methods: A total of 1,500 study subjects aged 19-69 years were interviewed with a questionnaire for their awareness and knowledge related to spontaneous ADR reporting. Computer assisted telephone interview was performed from 27th February 2013 to 4th March 2013. Target population was selected with quota sampling, using age, sex, and residence area. Healthcare professionals such as physicians, pharmacists, and nurses were excluded. The survey questions included awareness of spontaneous ADR reporting, opinions on ways to activate ADR reporting, and sociodemographic characteristics. Results: Overall awareness of spontaneous ADR reporting system was 8.3% (${\pm}2.53%$) among general population of Korea. Major source from which people got the information regarding ADR reporting was television/radio (69.9%), followed by internet (19.3%), and poster/brochure (6.1%). Awareness level differed between age groups (p<0.0001) and education levels (p<0.0001). Upon learning about the ADR reporting system, 88.5% of study subjects agreed on the necessity of ADR reporting system, while 46.6% thought promotion through internet and mass media as an effective way to activate ADR reporting. Conclusion: The overall awareness of spontaneous ADR reporting should be enhanced in order to establish a firm national system for drug safety. Adequate promotions should be performed targeting lower awareness groups, as well as various publicity activities via effective channels for the general population.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제16권3호
• /
• pp.127-160
• /
• 2006

Civil lawsuits have been the main instruments to resolve any civil disputes until recent times but it has its limitations in resolving all disputes in the specialized and technical disputes only according to the civil trial process. Therefore, many countries have carried out a series of discussions and investigations into the system of Alternate Dispute Resolution(ADR). It should especially be noted that all related countries in the world have enacted a basic ADR law to accelerate the usage of the ADR system. The most representative cases are the American Alternative Dispute Resolution Act of 1998 and Japan's Alternative Dispute Resolution Promotion Law set up in December 2004. As such, there is a need for Korea to enact a basic law regarding ADR following the world trend of major nations. This paper looks closely not only into the enactment circumstances and contents of Japan's ADR law whose legal system is similar to that of Korea but also the aftermath discussions of the Japanese academic circles into consideration, in the hopes of providing reference data for the legislation of the Korean ADR system and further aiding in the development of the ADR law theory.

• 한국임상약학회지
• /
• 제23권3호
• /
• pp.256-268
• /
• 2013

Objective: To study the attitudes and awareness of healthcare professionals (physicians, pharmacists, nurses and others) toward the Pharmacovigilance system and experience for adverse drug reactions (ADRs) from a Single University Hospital in Deajeon. Methods: A survey was performed using a structured questionnaire involving 360 health-care professionals at the hospital between $1^{st}$ November and $16^{th}$ November, 2012. Results: Sixty-five percent (n=235) of all respondents were experienced incidences of ADRs for their patients and 55.8% (n=201) knew the ADR Spontaneous Reporting System in the hospital. However, three-fourths (n=273, 75.8%) of respondents did not know the existence of the Korean Association of Regional Pharmacovigilance Centers (KARP) and 61.7% (n=222) were unaware of the obligation of ADR report from KFDA in cases of serious ADRs. About 83% (n=299) answered that the electronic ADR report system of the hospital was helpful while their work and most (n=336, 93.3%) agreed on the necessaries of the promotion and education about ADR. Conclusion: Seventy-five percent (n=271) of respondents wanted to continue the work for evaluation and feedback for ADRs reported in the hospital. However, the barriers to reporting ADR were; inconvenient ADR reporting system and the lack of time to report ADRs. This study showed that the easier ADR reporting system and education and promotion about ADRs for health-care providers are needed to improve the ADR reporting.