• 한국지역지리학회지
• /
• 제18권3호
• /
• pp.310-325
• /
• 2012

인류는 한 장소를 다른 장소와 구분하기 위해 지명을 사용해왔으며, 지역의 정체성을 잘 나타낼 수 있는 지명이 선택된다는 점에서, 지명은 인간의 집합적인 의식의 산물이다. 또한 지명은 끊임없이 변화하는 역사성을 가지며, 그 변화의 이면에는 사회 집단들의 경쟁과 투쟁 그리고 헤게모니 집단의 정체성을 나타내는 지명을 관철시키기 위한 정치적 의도가 자리하고 있다. 최근의 지리학계의 지명연구는 이러한 정치 사회적 과정에 주목하고 있으며, 본 논문은 이러한 연구경향의 연장선상에서, 1990년대 중반 도농통합적 행정구역 개편 당시 시의 명칭을 둘러싼 논쟁을 정치 지리학적으로 살펴보았다. 통합 당시 시 군 주민들은 지명이 가지는 역사성과 인지도를 내세우며 자신들의 주장을 정당화하였으며, 지역의 경제력이 정치적 자원으로 동원되기도 하였다. 그러나 결과적으로 통합시 명칭의 결정은 주로 인구규모나 기초의회 의원의 숫자 등 정치적 자원의 양으로 결정되었으며, 일부 지역은 시의 명칭을 통합의 협상카드로 사용하기도 하였다. 이는 지명의 결정이 정치적 경합관계의 산물임을 보여주며, 이러한 정치적 논쟁속에서 지명은 시 군의 영역성(territoriality)의 상징이 된다. 시명칭의 결정 이후에도 지명은 지역정치에서 지속적인 논란의 대상이 되며, 이는 향후 행정구역 개편과정에서 갈등을 완화할 수 있는 합리적인 지명 결정의 방법이 고민되어야 한다는 점을 시사한다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.47-68
• /
• 2004

The problems on application for custody in CIETAC Arbitration Rule are examined in this paper. First, The issue of jurisdiction for application for custody is arisen from the expansion of material jurisdiction of CIETAC. Until 1998, CIETAC had a jurisdiction only for the cases involving foreigners, but now, it has a jurisdiction not only for the cases involving foreigners but also for domestic cases. In the cases of arbitrating disputes involving foreigners, if the parties concerned apply for the preservation of property, CITEAC shall forward the application to and obtain a ruling from an intermediate people's court in the place where the object of the application resides, or where the property is located. But in the cases of arbitrating domestic disputes, if the parties concerned apply for the preservation of property, CITEAC shall forward the application to and obtain a ruling from an ground-level people's court in the place where the object of the application resides, or where the property is located. Therefore, "People's court" in article 23 of CIETAC Arbitration Rule includes both intermediate people's court and ground-level people's court in its meaning. Second, in the cases that the party concerned submits arbitration to CIETAC, it is not permitted for the party to ask the people's court for custody of property before submitting an arbitration. But there still can be the urgent cases that interests of the party concerned are at stake, and legitimate rights and interests of the party concerned may be damaged beyond remedy, if no application for custody of property is filed immediately. In that cases, even if the party may apply for custody of property with the people's court after submitting an arbitration, it might be too late to preserve property. Therefore, Chinese laws and rules have to be revised so that the party may ask the people's court for custody of property before submitting an arbitration. When revising laws and rules, according to the today's legislation trends, it must be considered that court and arbitration tribunal both have a right to decide the custody of property. When arbitration tribunal decides it, the procedural provisions executing it must be provided. It is also required that China permit to apply preservation of evidence as well as custody of property before submitting an arbitration. It is also strongly recommended that China permit custody of property or preservation of evidence even in the cases that an arbitration is submitted to the arbitration institute which is located in foreign country, not in China.

• 수산경영론집
• /
• 제48권3호
• /
• pp.15-32
• /
• 2017

This article's aim is to review the jurisprudence which has emerged pursuant to the international dispute settlement provisions and to provide a provisional expectation as to the future of international dispute settlement under "UNCLOS". Globally, marine fisheries play an important role in ocean biodiversity and the food security of millions of people, providing a vital source of high-quality dietary protein and supporting individuals' livelihoods and income. In the 1982 Convention, the establishment of co-operative mechanisms for effective monitoring, control, surveillance and enforcement, decision-making procedures facilitating the adoption of such measures of conservation and management, and the promotion of the peaceful settlement of disputes are called for. In this study, 'Northeast Asian Sea' means that the Yellow/East China Sea, the East Sea, the Ohotsk Sea, the Kamchaka Sea, the Alaska Sea, and the Bering Sea surrounded by Korea, China, Japan, Russia, U.S.A. and Canada including their EEZs. There are several bilateral fisheries agreements existing in Northeast Asian area, the Fisheries Agreement between Republic Korea and Japan, between Republic of Korea and China, between China and Japan, between Republic Korea and U.S.A., between Republic Korea and Russia, between Russia and Japan, And there are several regional fisheries organizations existing in Northeast Asian area, for example NPAFC(Convention for the Conservation of Anadromous Stocks in the North Pacific Ocean), CBSPC (Convention on the Central Bering Sea Pollack Conservation), PICES(North Pacific Marine Science Organization), NPFC(North Pacific Fishery Commi-ssion) etc. It analyzed the proliferation of bilateral treaties and multilateral treaties due to the adoption of the EEZ in Northeast Asia reviewed the strengthening of management rights on the high seas marine living resources and marine environment preservation of regional fisheries organizations. In view of the changes in the international fisheries mechanism this paper suggested the future direction of the country in overseas fisheries. We concluded as follows. We shall apply bilateral treaties first, regional fisheries organizations' treaties secondly, and provisions under "UNCLOS" for dispute settlement last.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제27권2호
• /
• pp.3-18
• /
• 2017

International legal reviews on ISD, a procedure for resolving disputes under the Korea-US FTA, are examined from the perspective of law. If the ISD system does not exist, even if the investor suffers damage due to the illegal act of the host country, he or she must file a lawsuit through the court of the host country, which is unreasonable from the investor's point of view and makes it difficult to guarantee fairness and transparency. Some of the Koreans pointed out that there are some problems with the KORUS FTA dispute settlement regulations, and that the United States federal courts are taking a friendly attitude to the decisions made by the US Customs in determining the dispute by the KORUS FTA Agreement and the US Customs Act. In cases where the State does not violate international law but results in harmful consequences, the responsibility of one country is borne by the treaty. Foreign investment always comes with many challenges and risks. Therefore, the ISD system is a fair and universal arbitration system, which is considered to be a necessary system even for protecting the Korean companies investing abroad. In the investment treaty, compensation for the nationalization of foreign property and reimbursement under the laws of the host country were dissatisfied with foreign investors. In particular, some Koreans have pointed out that there are some problems in the KORUS FTA dispute resolution regulations and there is a need for further discussion and research. Based on the experiences and wisdoms gained in the course of Korea-US FTA negotiations, the dispute arbitration mechanism is urgently needed to reduce the possibility of disputes and to make amicable directions.

• 한국건설관리학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국건설관리학회 2008년도 정기학술발표대회 논문집
• /
• pp.505-508
• /
• 2008

건설공사는 점점 대형화되고 복합화됨에 따라 도면과 시방서만으로는 모든 정보를 표현하는 것이 어려우며, 불확정적인 요소를 계약서에 명문화하는 것의 한계성으로 인해 분쟁이 지속적으로 발생하고 있다. 또한 우리나라의 건설공사는 상호평등의 원칙보다는 발주자 위주의 계약관행이 존재하고 있어서 비합리적인 조항을 계약관련 서류에 포함시키는 등의 일이 발생하고 있다. 계약상의 불이행이나 불만이 발생하더라도 약자의 위치에 있는 시공자는 계약체결 경향과 건설업체의 후속공사 수주목적을 위해 자체적 클레임회피경향이 지배적이다. 이렇듯 겉으로 표출되지 못하는 분쟁의 요인들이 존재하는 것이다. 이에 본 연구에서는 겉으로 표출되지 못했던 사전분쟁단계에서의 요인들을 조달청의 민원상담사례를 분석하여 사전분쟁요인들을 도출하고, 계층분석적 의사결정방법(AHP)을 활용하여 도출된 요인들간 중요도 분석을 실시하였다. 이상의 분석된 결과는 차후 건설공사에서 분쟁예방을 위한 체크리스트로 활용이 가능할 것으로 사료된다.

• Strategy21
• /
• 통권42호
• /
• pp.154-195
• /
• 2017

This paper is to analyse conflict between the US and China over the South China Sea and Korea's responses. To this end the paper is composed of 6 chapters titled instruction; the current status of South China Sea sovereignty disputes; changes in US and Chinese maritime security strategies and the strategic values of the South China Sea; key issues and future prospects for US-China conflicts in the South China Sea; South Korea's security and diplomatic responses; and conclusion. The recent East Asian maritime security issue has evolved into a global issue of supremacy between the US and China, beyond conflicts over territorial disputes and demarcation among the countries in the region. China is pursuing offensive ocean policy to expand economic growth. The core of the maritime order that the United States intends to pursue is the freedom of navigation in the oceans and the maintenance of maritime access. China is making artificial islands in the South China Sea, claiming the sovereignty of these islands, building strategic bases in East Asia, and securing routes. The United States has developed several "Freedom of Navigation Operations" to neutralize the declaration of the territorial sea surrounding Chinese artificial islands. We can not be free from marine conflicts in the South China Sea and the East China Sea. Regarding the South China Sea dispute, it is expected that the strategic competition and conflict between the two countries will intensify due to China's failure to make concessions of core interests and adherence to the US compliance with international norms. In the midst of conflict over the South China Sea, we need a harmonious balance between our alliance security and economic diplomacy. We must continue our efforts to strengthen the ROK-US alliance but not to make China an enemy. Considering the significant impacts of the oceans on the survival and prosperity of the nation, we must continue to develop our interest in the oceans, appropriate investments and tactical strategies.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.161-182
• /
• 1999

The purpose of this paper is to examine the applicability of the UNIDROIT Principle in international commercial arbitration. For this purpose, I have studies the basic two characters of this Principles: One is of general rule(principle); Another is of international and commercial character. According to CISG, questions concerning matters governed by the CISG which are not expressly settled in it are to be settled in conformity with the general principles, so this Principles will cover many questions which are not expressly settled in the applicable law, by gap-filing, analogy or usage. In the preamble of this Principles, there are five cases in which the Principles shall be applied or may be applied. If the disputes are submitted to the any national court, the application of this Principles would be restricted because of the mandatory rules of national, international or supranational origin. But the disputes are submitted to arbitration, the arbitrator would have more discretional powers to apply the Principles than the judge. The reason is that in the arbitration, the arbitrators do not bear obligation to act in conformity with the law applicable by virtue of the rules of rules of private international law. I also examined the applicability of the Principles in cases which there are no mentions in preamble: When the international arbitrators choose the Principles; When the arbitrators decide ex aequo et bono; When the both parties have not chosen the governing law; When there are gaps in domestic law chosen by the parties; When the applicable domestic law is insufficient. In all these cases, the Principles may be applied more easily and conveniently in arbitration than in litigation. Thus to envisage the application of this Principle in international arbitration, first both parties in international commercial contracts should incorporate this Principle as a governing law in their contracts, and second, the arbitrators should try to apply this Principles in their arbitrations by choice, analogy, general principles or usage.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제26권4호
• /
• pp.151-179
• /
• 2016

Emerging as a strategic domain of the service industry, the drone logistics industry is evolving into a zero effort industry, which realizes smart device service ranging from corporate services to daily customer services. The role of the drone industry is becoming increasingly important in strengthening national competitiveness, as well as corporate competitiveness, beyond the strengthening of product competitiveness. Although drones have various strengths and weaknesses for industries, there are plenty of possibilities for diverse disputes and conflicts due to lack of related laws, regulations, and institutional norms, as well as unsolved problems related to technologies and operations; that is, there are still policy tasks and problems to be solved such as unauthorized seizure of drones, hacking, protection of personal privacy, safety concerns, regulation and limitation of flying areas, damage relief, and dispute settlements. Thus, in order to vitalize the drone industry as a future growth engine while responding to the changes in the environment of the drone industry in Korea and overseas and to strengthen national and corporate competitiveness by harmonizing with advanced management innovations, it is necessary to conduct in-depth discussions and review policy issues related to the vitalization of the drone industry. Therefore, the purpose of this study is to review the domestic and overseas realities and statuses of the drone logistics industry and application cases, analyze policies regarding the drone logistics industry of each country, review general theories on the solution of disputes arising out of the transactions in the drone logistics industry, and, as a conclusion, suggest desirable policy issues for the vitalization of the drone logistics industry in Korea.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제21권1호
• /
• pp.259-277
• /
• 2011

In 2008, North Korea revised its Foreign Economic Arbitration Act. To some extent, the new Act reflected such international standard of arbitration as UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. In this paper, the said Act will be evaluated, and then cooperation ways of South-North Korea on Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration will be suggested. In 2007, the Ministry of Unification has designated the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board as Inter-Korean Arbitration Committee and has made efforts to prepare follow-up measures on the two Agreements of Inter-Korean Commercial Arbitration. In 2008 however, the follow-up measures has in fact been suspended. In order to revitalize the Inter-Korean commercial arbitration, some prerequisites must be satisfied. First, Inter-Korean Arbitration Committee for Inter-Korean commercial arbitration should re-open as soon as possible. Second, as North Korea recently shows interest in joining the New York Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards(now so called New York Convention), Governmental Authority of Rep. of Korea should also actively assist and support their joining in New York Convention. Third, both Korean governments should carry out joint study on raising the efficiency of the arbitration system which they will use. Fourth, comparative study on arbitration systems used in both countries should be conducted. Also, it may is very timely to discuss the issue in international arbitration community such as "North-East Asia International Arbitration Conference" or other similar events. In conclusion, continuous study on prevention of commercial disputes between South-North Korea and ways to resolve disputes when they arise should be conducted.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제18권2호
• /
• pp.55-77
• /
• 2008

The purpose of this paper is to make a research on the administration and practical problems of the arbitral organization called "uth-North Commercial Arbitration Commission". The Arbitration Commission shall be set up under the South-North Agreements officially called "reement on Settlement Procedure of Commercial Dispute" and "reement on Organization and Administration of the South-North Arbitration Commission" between the South and the North of Korea. A variety means of dispute settlement including friendly consultations, conciliation and arbitration called Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) will be used frequently and institutionally to settle commercial disputes and conflicts arising from economic transactions between the South and the North of Korea. Under the circumstances, it is becoming a problem of vital importance how to operate the Arbitration Commission for the prompt and effective settlement of the South-North commercial disputes. First of all, the South and the North of Korea should recognize the availability of prompt and effective means of dispute resolution such as arbitration and conciliation to be made by the Arbitration Commission would promote the orderly growth and encouragement of th South-North trade and investment, for which the following measures should be taken as soon as possible : 1. Enactment of the South-North Arbitration Rules. 2. Designation of the arbitral institution by North-Korean side. In this connection, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) was already designated officially as the arbitral organization of South Korean side as of April 17, 2007. 3. Arbitration shall be held in the place where the respondent has his domicile, in case that both parties fail to agree as to the place of arbitration. 4. Permission of a third country arbitration in case that both parties agree to do so. 5. To become a member country of international arbitration agreements including the New York Convention.