• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.68
• /
• pp.89-121
• /
• 2015

Investor-State Dispute Settlement(ISDS) grants a foreign investor the right to access an international arbitrator, if he believes actions taken by a host government are in breach of commitments made in an investment agreement or an investment treaty. The arbitration procedure of ICSID is made specifically to resolve investment disputes, so most of investment disputes have been settled in accordance with the procedure. Owing to limitation of dispute settlements through the ICSID arbitration procedure, several investment dispute conciliation schemes have been emerged as alternatives. In the case of a conciliation, the conciliation procedure will be in progress based on arbitrary agreement between parties, and if both parties agree on a conciliation program, then the arbitrary execution rate is relatively higher than that of arbitration procedures. In addition, it is evaluated that the time duration of conducting a conciliation procedure is in general rather short in 8 to 24months, and its incumbent cost is also rather inexpensive. Most of all, through amicable settlement of a dispute between a foreign investor and a host state, the foreign investor may continue his investment activities without a hitch, while the host state may invite more investment without any risk of losing its external credibility. In conclusion, it is desirable to lead any investment dispute between a foreign investor and a host state settle in accordance with the dispute settlement procedure as specified in the relevant investment agreement. In addition, to make the foreign investor continue his investment activities, it will be necessary to provide a separate investment dispute conciliation system aside from such arbitration procedures to cope any unexpected incident flexibly.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.8 no.2
• /
• pp.119-164
• /
• 2007

Improving the formal objection system regarding reviewing medical expenses requires authority and confidence in the aspect of well-functioning the health insurance review and assessment system, legally and appropriately. The purposes of improvement of the formal objection system should aim for protecting the people's right of health. On handling the formal objections, the disputes of the rights should be settled economically and promptly by fairness, specialty, and objectivity in the health insurance review and assessment administration. Therefore, in order to promote the administrative specialty of health insurance, the formal objection committee needs to be organized independently and guaranteed expertly. Under the current formal objection system, however, the organization of committee lacks right-relief function, recognition and public relation as a health insurance appeal system, and related professional man powers. It is also analyzed that there are several controversial points, such as mass deliberation to the formal objection committee and its conference procedure. As a measure of improvement, it is analyzed that the committee needs to be organized independently with a proper number of professional man powers. The strict deliberation procedures and the prohibition of the decision-making by non-conference are also required to be empowered. The formal objection procedure provides the beneficiaries and the claims legitimately, so that it secures the legal relations on the health insurance system. Therefore, on the conference process of formal objection, the expert and guaranteed protection should be provided promptly, and its procedures to the appellants should also be assisted kindly.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.133-156
• /
• 2004

The rapid development of the internet may not have occurred without techniques of linking and framing, which provide users flexible and easy access to other website. These techniques have enabled internet users to navigate the internet efficiently and sort through the products, services and information available on the internet. The Advent of the global information structure and the do-called EC revolution raise countless new issues and questions. There are no limitations regulating the expressions on the cyberspace due to internet's of quality anonymity? diversity? spontaneity. Therefore, the freedom of speech is expanded in both areas of time and space, which was impossible with the old communicating system. Although online technology raises many new legal issues, the law available to help us resolve them, at least today, is largely based on the world as it existed before online commerce became a reality. Thus the challenge is to predict how these new legal issues may be resolved using the current law. As a result of the drastic change of the environment for international trade of which that has taken took place in parallel with the global information technology revolution on a global basis, the scope of issues to be addressed which should be resolved by the conflict of laws principles has been remarkably expanded, and various new issues of an entirely which are quite new in its type and nature have arisen been raised. Further more in addition, the old act prior act was regarded as insufficient in that it lacked rules on international governing law to adjudicate, or international adjudicatory governing law, where as the expectation of the public was that the private international law should function as the basic law of the legal relational encompassing rules on governing law given the increase of It international disputes. for the move the private international law has also attracted more attention from the korean.

• Journal of Advanced Marine Engineering and Technology
• /
• v.40 no.9
• /
• pp.859-867
• /
• 2016

Bunker oil is an essential expense, and it is a high cost in ships' operations. Therefore, it forms an important part of the work shipowners do to minimize losses during operations. With bunkering disputes consistently occurring, bunker surveyors could be employed by shipowners through them and bunker survey companies signing a contract for a bunker surveyor service. Bunker surveyors could play the role of independent contractors and issue statements of fact in relation to bunkering. However, it would be impossible for bunker surveyors to immediately resolve a bunkering dispute since their role and the legal status is not clear while bunker surveys are being conducted on ships. Thus, this study sets out to define the legal status and liability of bunker surveyors and to seek an additional role for them when bunkering disputes occur.

• Korean Journal of Construction Engineering and Management
• /
• v.19 no.4
• /
• pp.70-81
• /
• 2018

Claims in the construction industry can have a serious impact on the profitability of the project or can even result in project failure if it fails to take appropriate prevention. In order to properly prevent and respond to the potential claims and legal disputes throughout the project execution, it is necessary to continuously accumulate informations and clearly define the roles and responsibilities of the important activities systematically. Based on these needs, this study develops and verifies the project information management system(PMIS) that can prevent and respond possible claims for construction projects. Developed system includes such management modules as schedule, cost, PM/CM, design, collaboration, and claims. The system was validated by adopting it to the practical projects. The results showed that information systems tailored to the construction claim need to elevate users' familiarity to be more useful. Besides, the system can be more functional when used by both owners and contractors.

• Health Policy and Management
• /
• v.31 no.3
• /
• pp.280-291
• /
• 2021

Background: Based on the fact that the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency is a public institution established by social demands for medical disputes, this study reviews the publicness of public organization and discusses its policy implications. Methods: Through Moore's strategic triangle, which consists of legitimacy and support, public value and operational capacity, the process of creating public value is examined. For the analysis, case studies were conducted using related literature data from 2012, when the agency was established, to the present. Results: As a result of the analysis, first, the related law examined in the operational capability has been revised dozens of times, but the revised law has its own contradictions and limitations. The human resource system is also being improved, but there is a problem with the fairness and reliability of the arbitration process, especially due to the limitations of the appraiser system. Second, in terms of legitimacy and support, a regional gap occurred despite efforts to improve accessibility through the expansion of the organization. And the arbitration agency failed to reconcile conflicts caused by stakeholders' perception of each other as a trade-off relationship. Third, the public value result shows that, despite many explicit (statistical) achievements, citizens' use of the past dispute resolution means (litigation) has not decreased. Likewise, the perception of value makers (citizens) is important for creating public value as an invisible result, but it has not yet been formally investigated, so the performance can not be recognized. Conclusion: While the organization's efforts for continuous change and improvement are encouraging, it is not perceived as a better means of resolving disputes and improving quality of services. Therefore, it is necessary to reconsider the institutional design centered on value creators.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.44 no.2
• /
• pp.95-107
• /
• 2019

The ICSID arbitral tribunal shall determine the suitability of investors in accordance with the Article 25 of the ICSID convention and the investment or investor's provisions under the BIT. The eligibility of investors has an important role in establishing jurisdiction under international investment disputes. Therefore, this study draws implications on issues related to investor qualification, focusing on ICSID arbitration. The investor's nationality shall be taken into consideration in determining whether the investor is eligible. The criteria for determining the nationality of a corporate investor include the place of incorporation, main business location, and substantial ownership or control. The criterion of the place of incorporation that is used in a number of BIT have the problem of protecting investors from third countries not involved in the BIT. So, in recent years it is stipulated that the actual economic activity or the main business location as well as the place of incorporation criteria. And this problem is complemented by the denial of benefit clause. When determining whether a local corporation is controlled by foreigner in the host state it considers the shareholding rate, voting rights, and the exercise of managerial rights. There is a tendency to recognize shareholder's right to petition. Thus the same damage should not cause problems such as duplicate repayment or double reimbursement between the shareholders and the company. Unexpected problems can arise if the scope of investments and investors is broadly specified in the BIT. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the scope of investment to be protected.

• Journal of the Korean Home Economics Association
• /
• v.41 no.12
• /
• pp.69-89
• /
• 2003

The purpose of this study was to investigate the current state of divorce negotiations and to identify major variables associated with positive divorce negotiations. Survey research was conducted on 182 men and 246 women residing in Daegu Metropolitan city area who had divorced between July 1999 and June 2002 with at least one child at the time of divorce. In conclusion, it was found that divorce negotiations are more influenced by the characteristics, natures and resources of the subjects than by the nature of issues being negotiated. The study findings' implications for research and practice were also discussed.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.17 no.2
• /
• pp.167-187
• /
• 2007

As Korea has reached a free trade agreement with the United States of America, it is required to provide an appropriate procedure to ".kr" domain name disputes based on the principles established in the Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy(UDRP). Currently, Internet address Dispute Resolution Committee(IDRC) established under Article 16 of the Act on Internet Address Resources provides the dispute resolution proceedings to resolve ".kr" domain name disputes. While the IDRC's proceeding is similar to the UDRP administrative proceeding in procedural aspects, the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy that is established by the IDRC and that applies to disputes involving ".kr" domain names is very different from the UDRP for generic Top Level Domain (gTLD) in substantial aspects. Under the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement(KORUS FTA), it is expected that either the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy to be amended to adopt the UDRP or the IDRC to examine the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy in order to harmonize it with the principles established in the UDRP. It is a common practice of cybersquatters to warehouse a number of domain names without any active use of these domain names after their registration. The Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy provides that the complainant may request to transfer or delete the registration of the disputed domain name if the registrant registered, holds or uses the disputed domain name in bad faith. This provision lifts the complainant's burden of proof to show the respondent's bad faith because the complainant is only required to prove one of the three bad faiths which are registration in bad faith, holding in bad faith, or use in bad faith. The aforementioned resolution procedure is different from the UDRP regime which requires the complainant, in compliance with paragraph 4(b) of the UDRP, to prove that the disputed domain name has been registered in bad faith and is being used in bad faith. Therefore, the complainant carries heavy burden of proof under the UDRP. The IDRC should deny the complaint if the respondent has legitimate rights or interests in the domain names. Under the UDRP, the complainant must show that the respondent has no rights or legitimate interests in the disputed domain name. The UDRP sets out three illustrative circumstances, any one of which if proved by the respondent, shall be evidence of the respondent's rights to or legitimate interests in the domain name. As the Domain Name Dispute Mediation Policy provides only a general provision regarding the respondent's legitimate rights or interests, the respondent can be placed in a very week foundation to be protected under the Policy. It is therefore recommended for the IDRC to adopt the three UDRP circumstances to guide how the respondent can demonstrate his/her legitimate rights or interests in the disputed domain name. In accordance with the KORUS FTA, the Korean Government is required to provide online publication to a reliable and accurate database of contact information concerning domain name registrants. Cybersquatters often provide inaccurate contact information or willfully conceal their identity to avoid objection by trademark owners. It may cause unnecessary and unwarranted delay of the administrative proceedings. The respondent may loss the opportunity to assert his/her rights or legitimate interests in the domain name due to inability to submit the response effectively and timely. The respondent could breach a registration agreement with a registrar which requires the registrant to submit and update accurate contact information. The respondent who is reluctant to disclose his/her contact information on the Internet citing for privacy rights and protection. This is however debatable as the respondent may use the proxy registration service provided by the registrar to protect the respondent's privacy.

• The Korean Society of Law and Medicine
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.85-116
• /
• 2013

Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency, "K-MEDI" in abbr. herein-after, is established on Apr. 9, 2012 according to the law cited in the title above for the purpose of settling medical disputes in a prompt, fair and efficient manner. Two special professional organizations are established in K-MEDI, one of them is Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Committee(hereinafter referred to as the "Mediation Committee") and the other Medical Malpractice Appraisal Board(hereinaf-ter referred to as the "Appraisal Board"), the mission of the latter is to investigate the facts concerning the disputed medical conduct and to research as to and apprai-se whether the medical conduct was negligent and whether a causal relationship exists. Each panel organized in the Mediation Committee or the Appraisal Board shall be comprised of five mediators or appraisers, including necessarily a judge or a prose-cutor respectively and any disputed case regardless of the scale, the importance or the complicacy shall be handled by a panel. As the system is not thought efficient or economic, the number of the members comprising a panel or total members com-prising the Mediation Committee or the Appraisal Board shoud be adjusted, and the process shoud be versified, including the "Rapid Process," for instance. A petition for the mediation of a medical dispute shall be rejected if the respondent fails to notify K-MEDI of his/her intention to accede to the mediation within 14days from the day on which the petition for the mediation was served(Art. 27 Cl. 7). As the option of an arbitrary decision whether the mediation proceedings shall be commenced or not given to the respondent by the clause is thought unfair, making the process unstable, and moreover, diminishing the purpose of the system established by the law cited above for solving the medical disputes, the clause shoud be amended not to allow the respondent the option of such an arbitrary deci-sion. K-MEDI shall conduct the "Program for Compensation of Medical Accidents"(Art 46) according to which unavoidable injuries caused by the medical accidents in the cour-se of childbirth and the "Advances for Damages"(Art. 47) that are the compensating moneys paid to victims in medical malpractice cases who fail to receive money at all or partly from the operator or the professional of a public health or medical institution although he/she has a final and conclusive right to be paid by them. Some operators or professionals of such institutions claim that both the programs violate their fundamental rights assured by the constitution, and that it be a justifica-tion of refusal to accede to the mediation. As any of the programs needs not to be conducted by K-MEDI, it may be a proper solution to change the conductor of the programs to avoid the unproductive controversy.