• 한국융합학회논문지
• /
• 제13권1호
• /
• pp.283-295
• /
• 2022

본 연구는 조직 구성원들의 정보보안 중요성 인식에 영향을 미치는 요인을 탐색하고자 한다. 이를 위해 예방 동기 이론을 근간으로 인지된 처벌 확신성, 인지된 대응 비용, 묵인이 인지된 정보보안 중요성 인식에 미치는 영향을 살펴보았다. 분석 결과는 다음과 같다. 첫째, 인지된 처벌 확신성은 정보보안 중요성 인식에 유의한 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 또한, 인지된 처벌 확신성은 묵인에 부정적 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 둘째, 대응 비용은 정보보안 중요성 인식에 긍정적 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 또한, 대응 비용은 묵인에 긍정적 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 마지막으로 묵인은 정보보안 인식 중요성에 부정적 영향을 미치는 것으로 나타났다. 따라서, 구성원들의 정보보안 중요성 인식을 위해서 보안 위반 행위에 확실한 처벌이 뒤따를 수 있다는 것을 인식시킬 필요가 있다. 동시에, 조직은 구성원들이 보안 행동을 수행하는 데 있어서 장해가 되는 요소들을 제거하는 시도도 해야 한다. 마지막으로, 조직의 보안에 관한 열린 소통이 가능하도록 해야 한다.

• 한국보육지원학회지
• /
• 제17권3호
• /
• pp.39-64
• /
• 2021

Objective: This study analyzed the compliance situation of class rules for 3-year olds in the Wisdom class at Sarang kindergarten. Methods: Research participants were composed of 17 young children and two teachers in the wisdom class for 3-year-olds and data collection and analysis were conducted by participant observation using the qualitative method. Results: Research results were as follows. The compliance situation of class rules included compliance, violation, and among compliance and violation. First, compliance was divided into compliance with assistance and self compliance. Compliance with assistance is for young children to follow the rules under the guidance, help, and instructions of teachers. Self compliance is for children to understand and follow the rules themselves. Second, Between compliance and violation is conflict of the rules created by different standards of class rules. Third, depending on who found the violation, violation was classified into teacher discovery, peer discovery, and acquiescence. The teacher discovery led to teacher guidance and teacher acquiescence, The peer discovery led to peer notification, peer resistance, peer punishment, and peer acquiescence. Conclusion/Implications: By looking at the compliance situation of class rules for three-year-olds, the educational implications of how to guide class rules were obtained for children.

• 디지털융복합연구
• /
• 제18권1호
• /
• pp.169-175
• /
• 2020

본 연구는 간호조직 내 태움(직장 내 괴롭힘)이 간호 조직성과의 인과관계와 조직침묵의 매개효과를 검증을 목적으로 한다. 본 연구의 조사대상은 서울에 위치한 A대학병원 273명의 간호사이며, 인과관계 및 매개효과 분석을 위하여 매개회귀분석를 실시하였다. 분석결과 태움은 기본적으로 간호조직성과에 부정적 영향을 주고 있었다. 조직침묵의 매개효과를 고려하였을 때, 체념적 침묵은 완전매개효과를 갖고 있는 것으로 나타나 태움이 직접적으로 조직성과에 부정적 영향을 주지는 않았으나, 체념적 침묵을 통하여 부정적 영향을 주고 있는 것으로 분석되었다. 방어적 침묵의 매개효과는 부분적이었으며, 태움이 직접적인 영향을 주고 있는 것과 동시에 방어적 침묵을 통하여서도 매개하여 부정적 영향을 주고 있는 것으로 나타났다. 태움의 부정적 영향은 간호조직의 성과에 직·간접적으로 영향을 주고 있고, 조직 침묵을 매개하기 때문에, 태움에 대한 제도적 예방을 통한 적극적 간호관리가 이루어져야 할 것이다.

• 무역학회지
• /
• 제43권6호
• /
• pp.25-50
• /
• 2018

국제비즈니스에서 구상보증제도는 제도적 특성과 그 간편성으로 그 청구과정에서 많은 문제점에 노출되고 있으며, 또한 이와 관련하여 실제로 많은 분쟁이 발생되고 있는 것이 현실이다. 특히 보증은행 또는 그 보증수혜자의 부당한 또는 사기적 청구, 또는 그 과정에서의 사기의 공모 또는 묵인 등이 있다. 한편 특별한 사유없이 보증은행의 지급거절 또는 법원의 지급금지명령을 통하여 거래당사자 간의 분쟁해결의 수단으로도 악용될 수 있다. 본 연구는 구상보증제도상 보증은행의 부당한 지급거절과 그 관련 쟁점에 대해 사례를 중심으로 분석하였다. 또한 본 연구는 비즈니스 관점에서 그 시사점과 적법한 대응방안을 제시하였다.

• 한국과학교육학회지
• /
• 제36권6호
• /
• pp.935-946
• /
• 2016

이 연구의 목적은 과학교육과 관련된 인지편향을 확인하고 과학교육을 통하여 인지편향을 줄일 수 있는 방법을 확인하기 위하여 계획되었다. 문헌조사를 통하여 연구되어진 인지편향을 수집하였고, 과학학습의 관련성이 높은 인지편향을 과학교육전문가와의 토론을 통하여 추출하였다. 연구 결과 합리적 인과관계추론을 방해하는 인지편향, 다양한 정보와 결론 생성을 방해하는 인지편향, 자기반성적 학습을 방해하는 인지편향, 자기 주도적 의사결정을 방해하는 인지편향, 범주 제한적 사고를 조장하는 인지편향의 다섯 가지로 분류하였고, 총 29개의 인지편향들을 조사하였다. 합리적 인과관계추론의 방해하는 인지편향은 목적론적 사고, 가용성 편향, 착각적 상관, 클러스터 착각이었다. 문제해결에서 다양한 정보의 탐색을 방해하는 인지편향은 선택적 지각, 실험자 편향, 확증편향, 단순 사고 효과, 주의 편향, 신념편향, 실용 오류, 기능적 고착, 틀 효과가 있었다. 자기반성적 학습을 방해하는 인지편향은 과도한 자신감 편향, 우월성 편향, 계획 오류, 기본적 귀인 오류, 더닝-크루거 효과, 사후확신편향, 맹점편향을 확인하였다. 자기 주도적 의사결정을 방해하는 인지편향은 동조효과, 편승효과, 집단사고, 권위에 호소, 정보편향이 있다. 마지막으로 범주 제한적 사고를 조장하는 인지편향으로는 심리학적 본질주의, 고정관념, 의인화, 외집단 동질성 편향이 있었다. 연구된 인지편향에 대한 심리학적 특징들과 과학교수-학습방법들을 토대로 인지편향을 줄이고 역량을 향상시킬 수 있는 수업 방법에 대해서 논의한다.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권31호
• /
• pp.27-56
• /
• 2013

The United Nations Command (UNC) and the communist North failed to reach an agreement on where the maritime demarcation line should be drawn in the process of signing a truce after the Korean War because of the starkly different positions on the boundary of their territorial waters. As a result, the Armistice Treaty was signed on July 1953 without clarification about the maritime border. In the following month, Commander of the UNC unilaterally declared the Northern Limit Line (NLL) as a complementing measure to the Armistice. Referring to this, North Korea and its followers in South Korea wrongfully argue that the NLL is a "ghost line" that was established not based on the international law. However, one should note that the waters south of the NLL has always been under South Korea's jurisdiction since Korea's independence from Japan on August 15, 1945. There is no need to ask North Korea's approval for declaring the territorial waters that had already been under our sovereign jurisdiction. We do not need North Korea's approval just as we do not need Japan's approval with regard to our sovereign right over Dokdo. The legal status of the NLL may be explained with the following three characteristics. First, the NLL is a de facto maritime borderline that defines the territorial waters under the respective jurisdiction of the two divided countries. Second, the NLL in the West Sea also serves as a de facto military demarcation line at sea that can be likened to the border on the ground. Third, as a contacting line where the sea areas controlled by the two Koreas meet, the NLL is a maritime non-aggression line that was established on the legal basis of the 'acquiescence' element stipulated by the Inter-Korea Basic Agreement (article 11) and the Supplement on the Non-aggression principle (article 10). Particularly from the perspective of the domestic law, the NLL should be understood as a boundary defining areas controlled by temporarily divided states (not two different states) because the problem exists between a legitimate central government (South Korea) and an anti-government group (North Korea). In this sense, the NLL problem should be viewed not in terms of territorial preservation or expansion. Rather, it should be understood as a matter of national identity related to territorial sovereignty and national pride. North Korea's continuous efforts to problematize the NLL may be part of its strategy to nullify the Armistice Treaty. In other words, North Korea tries to take away the basis of the NLL by abrogating the Armistice Treaty and creating a condition in which the United Nations Command can be dissolved. By doing so, North Korea may be able to start the process for the peace treaty with the United States and reestablish a maritime line of its interest. So, North Korea's rationale behind making the NLL a disputed line is to deny the effectiveness of the NLL and ask for the establishment of a new legal boundary. Such an effort should be understood as part of a strategy to make the NLL question a political and military dispute (the similar motivation can be found in Japan's effort to make Dokdo a disputed Island). Therefore, the South Korean government should not accommodate such hidden intentions and strategy of North Korea. The NLL has been the de facto maritime border (that defines our territorial waters) and military demarcation line at sea that we have defended with a lot of sacrifice for the last sixty years. This is the line that our government and the military must defend in the future as we have done so far. Our commitment to the defense of the NLL is not only a matter of national policy protecting territorial sovereignty and jurisdiction; it is also our responsibility for those who were fallen while defending the North-Western Islands and the NLL.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제5권
• /
• pp.53-75
• /
• 1993

This article is concerned with the comment on "Some New Problems of International Aviation Security-Considerations Forcused on its Legal Aspects". Ever since 1970, in addition to the problem of failure to accept the Tokyo, Hague and Montreal Conventions, there has been also the problem of parties to them, failing to comply with their obligations under the respective treaties, in the form especially of nominal penalties or the lack of any effort to prosecute after blank refusals to extradite. There have also been cases of prolonged detention of aircraft, passengers and hostages. In this regard, all three conventions contain identical clauses which submit disputes between two or more contracting States concerning the interpretation or application of the respective conventions to arbitration or failing agreement on the organization of the arbitration, to the International Court of Justice. To the extent to which contracting States have not contracted out of this undertaking, as I fear they are expressly allowed to do, this promision can be used by contracting States to ensure compliance. But to date, this avenue does not appear to have been used. From this point of view, it may be worth mentioning that there appears to be an alarming trend towards the view that the defeat of terrorism is such an overriding imperative that all means of doing so become, in international law, automatically lawful. In addition, in as far as aviation security is concerned, as in fact it has long been suggested, what is required is the "application of the strictest security measures by all concerned."In this regard, mention should be made of Annex 17 to the Chicago Convention on Security-Safeguarding International Civil Aviation against Acts of Unlawful Intereference. ICAO has, moreover, compiled, for restricted distribution, a Security Manual for Safeguarding Civil Aviation Against Acts of Unlawful Interference, which is highly useful. In this regard, it may well be argued that, unless States members of ICAO notify the ICAO Council of their inability to comply with opecific standards in Annex 17 or any of the related Annexes in accordance with Article 38 of the 1944 Chicago Convention on International Civil Aviation, their failure to do so can involve State responsibility and, if damage were to insure, their liability. The same applies to breaches of any other treaty obligation. I hope to demonstrate that although modes of international violence may change, their underlying characteristics remain broadly similar, necessitating not simply the adoption of an adequate body of domestic legislation, firm in its content and fairly administered, but also an international network of communication, of cooperation and of coordination of policies. Afurther legal instrument is now being developed by the Legal Committee of ICAO with respect to unlawful acts at International airports. These instruments, however, are not very effective, because of the absence of universal acceptance and the deficiency I have already pointed out. Therefore, States, airports and international airlines have to concentrate on prevention. If the development of policies is important at the international level, it is equally important in the domestic setting. For example, the recent experiences of France have prompted many changes in the State's legislation and in its policies towards terrorism, with higher penalties for terrorist offences and incentives which encourage accused terrorists to pass informations to the authorities. And our government has to tighten furthermore security measures. Particularly, in the case an unarmed hijacker who boards having no instrument in his possession with which to promote the hoax, a plaintiff-passenger would be hard-pressed to show that the airline was negligent in screening the hijacker prior to boarding. In light of the airline's duty to exercise a high degree of care to provide for the safety of all the passengers on board, an acquiescence to a hijacker's demands on the part of the air carrier could constitute a breach of duty only when it is clearly shown that the carrier's employees knew or plainly should have known that the hijacker was unarmed. The general opinion is that the legal oystem could be sufficient, provided that the political will is there to use and apply it effectively. All agreed that the main responsibility for security has to be borne by the governments. A state that supports aviation terrorism is responsible for violation of International Aviation Law. Generally speaking, terrorism is a violation of international law. It violates the sovereign rights of states, and the human rights of the individuals. We have to contribute more to the creation of a general consensus amongst all states about the need to combat the threat of aviation terrorism. I think that aviation terrorism as becoming an ever more serious issue, has to be solved by internationally agreed and closely co - ordinated measures.