• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• v.18 no.4
• /
• pp.425-461
• /
• 2014

This paper analyzes the impact of the Canada-Korea Free Trade Agreement on the basis of the published text and agreed schedule of commitments. We find that the Agreement reinforces existing patterns of comparative advantage between Canada (agriculture and resource-based sectors) and Korea (autos and other industries). The sensitive sectors that held up the deal for years - autos into Canada and beef into Korea - witness major trade gains, but are not unduly disrupted. In both economies, the major output gains otherwise come in non-traded services sectors, driven by income effects. We find that trade diversion effects are quite significant; this lends support for the domino theory of major free trade agreements - since the Korea-EU agreement broke the ice, the pressure has intensified on third parties to re-level playing fields by striking their own deals. The study breaks new ground in modelling services trade by developing policy impacts based on the extent to which the text of the Agreement modifies Korea's and Canada's scores on the OECD's Services Trade Restrictiveness Index and by providing estimates of Mode 3 Services trade impacts. The analysis of the Agreement as negotiated, the present study, in our view, is a step forward in understanding the impact of modern free trade agreements.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.77
• /
• pp.43-67
• /
• 2018

Arbitration is one of alternative dispute resolution systems which settle a dispute by arbitrators(private persons) based on a contract between contracting parties without a judicial litigation system involved. As a valid arbitration agreement is an essential requirement for commencement of arbitration, the first thing to be determined is whether there is a valid arbitration agreement or not when a dispute is submitted. A consumer arbitration agreement usually exists as an arbitration clause in an adhesive contract between consumers and a seller. When consumers buy a product from a seller, they are requested to agree on a general terms and conditions which are unilaterally drafted by a seller in advance. These terms and conditions are not negotiable because it is an adhesive contract and consumers are placed in "take-it-or-leave-it" position. Therefore, even though there is an arbitration agreement between consumers and a seller, it has to be carefully considered whether it has a legal effect or not. In this respect, a court will examine if an arbitration agreement has procedural unconscionability and substantive unconscionability. Therefore, as U.S is a well-advanced and arbitration-friendly country, this paper analyzes four U.S cases to find out (i) what a court considers, (ii) how a court examines and interprets procedural and substantive unconscionability and (iii) if there has been a change in regard to a court's decision. By doing so, it will provide some suggestions and guidelines for a consumer arbitration in Korea.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.1
• /
• pp.125-146
• /
• 1989

This paper is examine the problems of U.S.-Korea Air Service Agreement and recommend some directions for its improvement under the rapidly changing circumstance and growing importance of Korean penisula. Since the provisional agreement of 1949, U.S. -Korea Air Service Agreement has consistently been favorable to U.S. side. Fair and equal opportunity is the principle and basis of the bilateral air agreement. Notwithstanding such principle, it is only the U.S. carriers who can freely enter into any market, under the discretion of business strategy, while Korean carrier can serve only three points including Honolulu. In an effort to recitify such serious imbalance, Korea continuousely requested additional rights and has given utmost efforts to accommodate requests made by U.S. carries without much success. When we review aviation market between Korea and U.S. under the present agreement, Korea is fully open to U.S. carries as they can connect from any or all points in the U.S. via any or all points in Korea and all points beyond Korea. Increased number of U.S. carriers are enjoying greater utilization of the opportunity accorded them. Four(4) U.S. carries now operate to Korea using thirteen(13) gateway points and about one hundred fifty(150) on-line points in the U.S. such imbalance can be well understood when we review the exchange of traffic rights between the U.S. and the Pacific rim countries. During the yeras following the 1978 agreement with Korea, the U.S. proceeded to sign liberal agreements with Thailand, Taiwan, Singapore and the Phillipines. In exchange, the U.S. granted the four Pacific rim countries substantially greater rights than were granted to Korea, although Korea was the first Asian nation to sign a pro-competitive aviation agreement which granted U.S. carriers unrestricted market access and pricing flexibility. Moreover, Korea ranks the 2nd trading and tourist partner to the U.S. among the Pacific rim countries (Japan is the largest partner to the U.S. in terms of both trade and tourist market). In this paper such problems in the Korea-U.S. Air Services Agreement are analyzed in terms of historical perspective, U.S. Aviation policy, imbalance status in detail cases, discrimination to Korea comparing to other Asian countries, and theoretical application. And further it discusses current aviation issues between Korea and U.S. such as the ratification of 1980 MOU and various doing business issues of U.S. carriers in Korea. Finally, this paper concludes the analysis and suggests some directions to improve and rectify the problems and imbalance of U.S.-Korea Air Services Agreement in question.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.25-42
• /
• 2009

That occur in international trade disputes between the parties without resorting to a court trial on the basis of principle of government by the parties to resolve the dispute resolution in general (Alternative Disputes Resolution: ADR) agreed to, reconciliation, coordination, mediation and other methods are. Here, unlike arbitration and other dispute resolution arbitrator, the court confirmed the arbitration award came from the judge and the same shall become effective in doing international commerce dispute resolution methods are widely used. Arbitration Agreement is a contractual dispute, regardless of whether a certain law there arise about the relationship between the parties, Currently exists, future conflicts can arise in whole or in part by the arbitration agreement is to be resolved. Arbitration agreement include: the effects of out of contract arbitration proceedings, the court does not want the progress of the dispute referred to arbitration proceedings to the effect, and the presence of the parties to the arbitration agreement does not claim to knowing the defense plea that Appeals ticket of destruction that have the effect of demurrer, that the arbitration agreement are rebuttal to the rebuttal of prozesshindernde Einrede and the mediation of a plea on the merits when the first defense must be submitted to the arbitration proceedings in which the applicant until the arbitration award determined that the property dispute to court for water conservation measures to dispose of the watch was in effect for arbitration in the contract. In addition, the arbitration agreement and the court sentenced the same kinds of effects that resolved the final effect, especially at the same time the effect of foreign recognition and enforcement of the decision regarding the New York Convention arbitration award based on the recognition and enforcement of domestic and international effects are being recognized. Consequently, the arbitration agreement to take effect a valid arbitration agreement exists is determined by whether or not staying. Therefore, agreements between individual university entrance exams based on the company signed a contract regarding the effect of arbitration first, associated with individual university entrance exams, and the leading research and analysis, review, and examine the general concept of the arbitration agreement after the arbitration agreement between the parties focuses on information about the effects of study to contribute to the activation of the arbitration system is aimed at the individual university entrance exams.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• v.52 no.3
• /
• pp.200-203
• /
• 2012

Objective : The sub-axial injury classification (SLIC) and severity scale was developed to decide whether to operate the cervical injured patient or not, but the reliability of SLIC and severity scale among the different physicians was not well known. Therefore, we evaluated the reliability of SLIC among a spine surgeon, a resident of neurosurgery and a neuro-radiologist. Methods : In retrograde review in single hospital from 2002 to 2009 years, 75 cases of sub-axial spine injured patients underwent operation. Each case was blindly reviewed for the SLIC and severity scale by 3 different observers by two times with 4 weeks interval with randomly allocated. The compared axis was the injury morphology score, the disco-ligamentous complex score, the neurological status score and total SLIC score; the neurological status score was derived from the review of medical record. The kappa value was used for the statistical analysis. Results : Interobserver agreement of SLIC and severity scale was substantial agreement in the score of injury morphology [intraclass correlation (ICC)=0.603] and total SLIC and severity sacle (ICC value=0.775), but was fair agreement in the disco-ligamentous complex score (ICC value= 0.304). Intraobserver agreements were almost perfect agreement in whole scales with ICC of 0.974 in a spine surgeon, 0.948 in a resident of neurosurgery, and 0.963 in a neuro-radiologist. Conclusion : The SLIC and severity scale is comprehensive and easily applicable tool in spine injured patient. Moreover, it is very useful tool to communicate among spine surgeons, residents of neurosurgery and neuro-radiologists with sufficient reproducibility.

• Archives of Plastic Surgery
• /
• v.44 no.4
• /
• pp.283-292
• /
• 2017

Background Settlements between doctors and patients provide a solution to complicated disputes. However, some disputes may be renewed as a result of negligence by both parties. The purpose of this study was to review the legal issues that may potentially arise during the preparation of settlement agreements and to propose a list of requirements for ensuring the effectiveness of these settlement agreements. Methods Data from 287 civil cases concerning aesthetic surgery that took place between 2000 and 2015 were collected from a court database in South Korea. Factors that influenced the effectiveness of settlement agreements were analyzed. Results Among the 287 court precedents, there were 68 cases of covenant not to sue. Eighteen cases were dismissed because the settlement agreements were recognized as effective, and 50 cases were sent forward for judgment on their merits because the agreements were not recognized as effective. The types of surgery and types of complications were classified by frequency. We evaluated the geographical distribution of the precedents, the settlement timing, and the effectiveness and economic impact of the settlements. We found that there was no statistically significant relationship among these factors. Four major factors that made a settlement agreement legally effective were identified, and the data showed that fee-free reoperations were not considered by the court in determining the compensation amount. Conclusions When preparing a settlement agreement, it is advisable to review the contents of the agreement rather than to take the preparation of a settlement agreement per se to be legally meaningful.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.29 no.2
• /
• pp.3-34
• /
• 2019

The resumption of economic cooperation between South and the North Korea will be a new growth engine for our economy. Many Korean companies are preparing to invest in North Korea in accordance with the progress of inter-Korean relations. However, there are many risks inherent in inter-Korean economic cooperation, as experienced in previous cases. Specifically, one should be prepared for unfair measures such as the expropriation of investment assets of South Korean enterprises by North Korea authorities. Therefore, it is essential to review the protection measures of investment in North Korea and to review the investment dispute settlement system. The South and the North have an agreement to establish the inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration Committee to resolve the disputes that may arise if one party's investments are lost due to inappropriate or unfair measures due to the other party's authority. However, the Investment Agreement, which governs the Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration Committee, contains a number of declarative statements that are somewhat ineffective. Even today, nearly 20 years after the adoption of the Agreement, the specific detailed procedures have shown no real progress, such as in the enactment of arbitration rules. Therefore, at present, it is difficult to expect a system that can effectively address the damage of our corporations which have invested in North Korea. When the assets freeze after the suspension of Kumgang tourism and the closure of the Kaeseung Industrial Complex by North Korea, the activation of the inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration Committee is the most important prerequisite for economic cooperation with North Korea. For this purpose, the resolution of disputes through the Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration Committee has to be made more concrete, with the effectiveness of the dispute settlement system enhanced by means of various efforts.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• v.20 no.3
• /
• pp.311-338
• /
• 2016

In the race for establishing trading architecture consistent with new landscape of the global economy, the US is ahead of the game by concluding the Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement with 11 countries. To make it reality, the ratification is essential. In the battle for ratification in the US, declining globalism confronts rising protectionism. This paper models the ratification process as contest between globalism and protectionism, and analyzes the optimal timing for ratification. Based on this framework, various ratification scenarios are analyzed. The paper argues less likelihood for the lame-duck session passage and more likelihood for prolonged and protracted delay, due to changing political dynamics and declining intellectual support for globalism. Hence, the future of Trans Pacific Partnership Agreement may prove different, compared to the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Korea-US Free Trade Agreement, both of which were renegotiated and ratified eventually. Then, the US would lose the first move advantage. The paper also discusses strategic implications of delayed ratification on the evolution of trading architecture in East Asia.

• East Asian Economic Review
• /
• v.25 no.3
• /
• pp.233-272
• /
• 2021

The Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) agreement, signed in November 2020, comes shortly after the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) entered into force and the US-China Trade War escalated. We use a computable general equilibrium model to assess the long-term effects of these three developments on income, trade, economic structure, factor returns and employment across the world, and especially in Asia-Pacific countries. The results suggest that RCEP could generate income gains that will be almost twice as large as those of the CPTPP, and that the two agreements together will largely offset the substantial negative effects of the US-China Trade War for the world as a whole. All three policy developments, but especially RCEP, will deepen East Asian production networks and will raise productivity and increase wages and employment in much of East Asia. At the sectoral level, regional trade in non-durable and durable manufactures will experience the most growth.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.30
• /
• pp.91-120
• /
• 2006

An Arbitration agreement is one kind of contracts between two or more contracting parties; any possible disputes that arise concerning a contract will be settled by arbitration. Contracting parties who have made a valid arbitration agreement will submit a dispute for settlement to private persons(arbitrators) instead of to a court. Arbitration may depend upon the agreement of the private parties, but it is also a system which has been built on the law and which relies upon that law in order to make it effective both nationally and internationally. That is to say, arbitration is wholly dependent on the underlying support of the court. The complementarity of the courts and of the arbitrators is a well-established fact; they seek for the common purpose, the efficacy of international commercial arbitration. Most states' laws contain the provisions which have been set for the supportive role of the courts relating to arbitration; (1) the enforcement of the arbitration agreement(rulings on validity of the arbitration agreement), and the establishment of the tribunal at the beginning of the arbitration, (2) challenge of arbitrators, interim measures, and intervention during evidence in the middle of the arbitral proceedings, (3) filing of the award, challenge of the arbitral award, and recognition and enforcement of the arbitral award at the end of the arbitration. Most international instruments and national laws concerning arbitration believe that authoritative courts should play their power not to control and supervise arbitration but to support and develop the merits of arbitration at most. 1985 UNCITRAL Model Law also expressly limit the scope of court's intervention to assist arbitration, not to control it.