• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.44
• /
• pp.31-55
• /
• 2009

This study attempts to provide a comparative overview of the liability systems Korean law and the PELS adopt, that is, the approaches taken by Korean law and the PELS to deal with various irregularities of contractual performance. In addition, it examines in a comparative way the questions of what is the position of the seller's liability for his delivery of defective goods under the chosen liability system and what is the legal nature of the seller's liability. The study finds that the dual liability system taken by Korean law has caused some complexities as to the matter of which liability is applicable in some borderline cases. The problem in such complexities is originated in that the remedies available and the limitation period applicable are differentiated in accordance with one's different categorization among three types of default under the general liability and defective performance under the seller's guarantee liability. In this light, the study argues that the unified liability system under the PELS is superior because its concept of non-performance embraces in a unitary manner all the aspects of default including defects in quality, quantity and title. In addition, it finds that Korean law has suffered endless debates on the question of what are the true contents of the same remedies of rescission and damages provided under the seller's guarantee liability as under the general liability. The debates have been come along on the basis of the traditional presumption among some of civil law jurisdictions that two liabilities be different in terms of not only their legal nature but also their contents of remedies. The study argues that the problem may be circumvented, first, by another way of thinking that the unified liability in Korean law is inferred from the specification of the identical remedies for both the general liability and the seller's guarantee liability under the KCC, second, by the preposition that the requirement of fault be depended upon what remedy the buyer seeks to claim rather than what liability he does to rely on.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.11
• /
• pp.251-278
• /
• 1998

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.3
• /
• pp.108-169
• /
• 1992

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Marine Engineers Conference
• /
• 2006.06a
• /
• pp.129-132
• /
• 2006

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.65
• /
• pp.21-49
• /
• 2015

This study primarily concerns the various franchisor's duties provided under the Draft Common Frame of Reference (here-in-after DCFR) in comparison with those under Korean law. It particularly focuses on the followings. First, it scrutinizes the rules on the scope of application in a comparative way, focusing on the following questions; what is the definition of a franchise contract and what are the essential elements of such contract. Second, it investigates in a comparative way the provisons as to the franchisor's contractual duties as follows; 1) a duty to collaborate actively and loyally and coordinate their respective efforts, 2) a duty to provide the franchisee with adequate and timely information before the contract is concluded, 3) a duty to grant the franchisee a right to use the intellectual property rights, 4) a duty to provide the franchisee with the know-how, 5) a duty to render the franchisee with assistance, 6) a duty to ensure the products ordered by the franchisee are supplied, 7) a duty to provide information during the performance, 8) a duty to warn the franchisee decreased supply capacity, 9) a duty to make reasonable efforts to promote and maintain the reputation of the franchise network. Its emphasis is particularly put on the rationals, the contents and the nature of such duties. Third, this study provides legal and practical advice to the contracting parties when they intend to insert either the DCFR or Korean law in their contract as a governing law.

• Proceedings of the Korea Institute of Fire Science and Engineering Conference
• /
• 2008.04a
• /
• pp.57-60
• /
• 2008

A comparative study on the prevention regulation of historical heritage between Korea and Japan. Every years fire accident to historical building is increasing such as Daewoongjun, Naksansa, Namdaemun and so on. The aim of this comparative study is to investigate and compare the prevention regulation in the side of fire safety of historical building between Korea and Japan. This study focus on the background of development and exchange of Fire safety law in Japan because of same condition, building material and prevention regulation.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.28 no.6
• /
• pp.96-105
• /
• 2001

The purpose of this study is to establish landscape planning, and to find out to administrative system and improvement way on landscape plan in Korea. We have sought for research trend and the concept of landscape planning related to the landscape planning through the investigation of books and documents, and have analyzed the characteristics on the law for landscape plan in United State of America, United Kingdom,, France, Germany, Japan and Korea. As the results of this study are as follows; 1) A state developing local self-governing body as United State of America, United Kingdom and Germany carried out individually landscape plan. Especially, it raises clarity of administration to fix residents participation(Nonprofit Organization : NPO) and secures responsibility. 2) A state of centralized authoritarian rule as France and Japan applies common law to the nationwide but commission's concrete management or conference. 3) And so in Korea and applicable landscape plan was made on the basis of town-planning law and managed with ordinances for landscape. In here the important thing is division of role of central and local government and residents. This study proposes the system of planning and analyzed the related laws for the landscape formation and management. The future research on the character of the local areas, providing many chances with people in the community through publicity activities, and rearing the expert group on this matter should be made in the future.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.17
• /
• pp.227-250
• /
• 2002

This paper is to explore the direction of international software protection laws, either copyright or patent right, by examining the current situations in the United States, European countries, Asia including Korea and the WTO/TRIPs Agreement. According to the comparative legal systems, each court and office gives both copyrightability and patentability of software by a stronger and appropriate intellectual property protection system.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.19
• /
• pp.33-66
• /
• 2003

This is a comparative and analytical study which comprises of the analysis of the rules of the buyer's remedies where the seller delivers defective goods of four legal systems; Directive, CISG, English law and Korean law. In light of threefold main purposes of this study, it firstly attempts to describe and analyze the remedy provisions of Directive in a comparative way in order to provide legal advice to the sellers who plans to enter into English consumer markets. It shows that the two tier remedial system under Directive is not much different from the other jurisdictions, except where the right of rescission under Directive is absolute in a sense that it does not require a certain degree of seriousness of defect. Secondly, the study compares the rules of one jurisdiction with those of other jurisdictions and evaluates the rules in light of the discipline of comparative law the basic question of which is whether a solution from one jurisdiction may facilitate the systematic development and reform of another jurisdiction. It proves the followings; (1) the reluctance and uncertainty in English law of ordering specific performance based on the discretionary power does not reflect the parties' preference because the order is either uncertain or rather negative where the purchase of substitute goods elsewhere is not a satisfactory solution in many cases; (2) the position in Korean law which has no limitation on the right to require substitute goods is likely unfair in commercial sales, but justified in consumer sales; (3) the right of termination or reduction under Directive which is subject to the applicability of the right to require repair or substitute goods seems to be contrary to the consumer's preference where the defective delivery destroys the basis of trust in the quality of the seller's performance; (4) the absolute right of termination under Directive and English law seems crucial in consumer sales because they are often inferior to commercial sellers in terms of information and bargaining power; (5) the right of reduction as a self-help remedy which is absent in English law emphasizes its usefulness. Thirdly, it finds that, where CISG is deemed to fail to unify different rules on the right to require specific performance between Civil and Common law, it is attempted once again in Directive and notwithstanding their hostility to awarding the right to require specific performance in English law, Regulations 2002 expressively stipulates such right.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.58
• /
• pp.267-286
• /
• 2013

Origin verification is regarded most essential for FTA performance administration. This administration is divided into direct and indirect system where Korea has adapted indirect system to Korea-EU FTA while direct system to Korea-USA FTA. A comparative analysis was conducted on the system of origin verification and provisions contained in preferential tariff law of each countries. The study finds that Korean origin verification system is a bit lack of procedural provision resulting in less protection of domestic trader's rights. Another point is that Korean Customs Authority is weak, in respect of organization and man power, to protect illegal bilateral tariff application by counter part FTA countries. And therefore this study suggests the policy makers to arrange detailed FTA origin verification procedures with earliest meeting with counter part FTA countries, and further stress that make up of organization and man power for origin verification in a timely manner.