• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.91-120
• /
• 2020

The Scope of Application of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act and Foreign Investment Act This article examines whether the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act and the Foreign Investment Act of North Korea apply to South Korean parties or companies. This article analyzes laws and agreements related to economic cooperation between South Korea and North Korea. Furthermore, this article compares and evaluates laws related to foreign investment and enacted in North Korea. Now, North Korea's door is closed due to economic sanctions against it, but it will be opened soon. Thus, this article prepares for the future opening of North Korea's markets. Is there a rule of laws in North Korea or just a ruler? Are there laws in North Korea? North Korea has enacted a number of legislation to attract foreign investors, referring to those Chinese laws. For example, North Korea enacted the Foreigner Investment Act, the Foreigner Company Act, the Foreign Investment Bank Act, the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, the Foreign Economic Contract Act, the International Trade Act, and the Free Economy and Trade Zone Act, among others. Article 2 (2) of the Foreign Investment Law of North Korea states, "Foreign investors are corporations and individuals from other countries investing in our country." It is interpreted that South Korea is not included in the "other countries" of this definition. According to many mutual agreements signed by South Korea and North Korea, the relationship between the two Koreas is a special relation inside the Korean ethnic group. An arbitration between a South Korean party and a North Korean party has the characteristics of both domestic arbitrations and international arbitrations. If the South Korea and North Korea Commercial Arbitration Commission or the Kaesong Industrial Complex Arbitration Commission is not established, the possibility of arbitration by the Chosun International Trade Arbitration Commission, established under North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, should be examined. There have been no cases where the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act is applied to disputes between parties of South Korea and North Korea. It might be possible to apply the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act by recognizing the "foreign factor" of a dispute between the South Korean party and North Korean party. It is necessary to raise legislative clarifications by revising the North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act as to whether Korean parties or companies are included in the scope of this Act's application. Even if it is interpreted that South Korean parties or companies are not included in the scope of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, disputes between South Korean companies and North Korean companies can be resolved by foreign arbitration institutes such as CIETAC in China, HKIAC in Hong Kong, or SIAC in Singapore. Such arbitration awards could be enforced in North Korea pursuant to Article 64 of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act. This is because the arbitration awards of foreign arbitration institutes are included in the scope of North Korea's Foreign Economic Arbitration Act. The matter is how to enforce the North Korean laws when a North Korean party or North Korean government does not abide by the laws or their contracts. It is essential for North Korea to join the New York Convention (Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards) and the ICSID Convention (Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States).

• The Sea:JOURNAL OF THE KOREAN SOCIETY OF OCEANOGRAPHY
• /
• v.19 no.4
• /
• pp.223-231
• /
• 2014

In order to prevent the spread of non-indigenous aquatic species through the ballast water in commercial ships, International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted in 2004 the International Convention for Control and Management of Ship's Ballast Water and Sediments. The Convention mandates treatment of ballast water for most transoceanic voyages and its confirmation of treatment is made with plankton live/dead assay. Fluorescein diacetate assay (FDA), which produces bright green light for live phytoplankton, has been a de facto standard method to determine the survival of marine plankton, but its staining efficacy has been in dispute. In the present study, we examined the limitation of FDA, and compared its efficacy with Neutral red (NR) staining, another promising assay and widely used especially for zooplankton mortality. For all phytoplankton species studied in the present study, except Ditylum brightwellii, the staining efficiency was <50% with FDA. The green FDA fluorescence interfered with phytoplankton autofluorescence in most samples. In contrast, NR assay stained over 90% of both phytoplankton and zooplankton species tested in this study. FDA assay also showed that green FDA fluorescence rapidly faded when phytoplankton cells were exposed to microscope light. Both FDA and NR assay were negative on formalin-killed individuals of both phytoplankton and zooplankton species. Our results suggest that NR assay is more effective for determining the survival of marine plankton and can be applied to test the efficacy of ballast water treatment.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.31-52
• /
• 2019

As international transactions have grown more numerous, situations of disputes related to the transactions are getting more complicated and more diverse. Cost-effective remedies to settle the disputes through traditional methods such as adjudications of a court will be insufficient. There fore, nations are attempting to more efficiently solve investor-state disputes through arbitration under organizations such as the ICSID Convention, the ICSID Additionary Facility Rules, and the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules by including the provisions on investor-state dispute settlement at the conclusion of an investment agreement. In case of an arbitration under the ICSID Convention, ICSID directly exercises the supervisorial function on arbitral proceedings, and there is no room for the intervention of national courts. In time of the arbitration where the ICSID Convention does not apply, however, the courts have to facilitate the arbitral proceedings. When the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award under the ICSID Convention are guaranteed by the Convention, it should be considered that the New York Convention does not apply to them under the Convention Article 7 (1) fore-end. In exceptional cases in which an arbitral award under the ICSID Convention cannot be recognized or enforced by the Convention, the New York Convention applies to the recognition and enforcement because the award is not a domestic award of the country in which the recognition or enforcement is sought. It is up to an interpretation of the New York Convention whether the New York Convention applies to ISDS arbitral awards not based on the ICSID Convention or not. Although an act of the host country is about sovereign activities, a host country and the country an investor is in concurring to the investment agreement with the ISDS provisions is considered a surrender of sovereignty immunity, and it will not suffice to exclude the investment disputes from the scope of application of the New York Convention. If the party to the investment agreement has declared commercial reservation at its accession into the New York Convention, it should be viewed that the Convention applies to the recognition and enforcement of the ISDS awards to settle the disputes over an investitive act, inasmuch as the act will be considered as a commercial transaction. When the recognition and enforcement of an arbitral award on investment disputes about a nation's sovereign act have been sought in Korea and Korea has been designated the place of the investment agreement arbitration as a third country, it should be reviewed whether the disputes receive arbitrability under the Korean Arbitration Act or not.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.19-45
• /
• 2009

The purpose of this paper is to research the contents and issues of the draft legislation of Part VI the Carriage by Act of Korean Commercial Code in respect of the liability of the carrier in the carriage of cargo by air, comparing to the related provisions of the Montreal Convention of 1999. The Montreal Convention in respect of the international carriage by air was adopted in 1999, and Korea has ratified the Montreal Convention in 2007. However, there is now no national legislation in respect of the carriage by air in Korea. Thus, the Ministry of Justice has prepared the draft legislation of Part VI the Carriage by Air of the Korean Commercial Code in July 2008, and the draft legislation is now being reviewed by the National Assembly. The draft provisions of Part VI the Carriage by Air are basically adopting most of the related provisions of the Montreal Convention in respect of the carriage of cargo by air and some draft provisions are applying the related provisions of the Korean Commercial Code in respect of the carriage of cargo by land and sea. In respect of the liability of the carrier in the carriage of cargo by air, the contents of the draft legislation of Part VI the Carriage by air are composed of the provisions in respect of the cause of the liability of the and the application for the non-contractual claim, the limit of liability, the exoneration from liability, the extinguishment of liability, the notice of damage to cargo, the liability of the agents and servants of the carrier, and the liability of the actual carrier and successive carrier. The draft legislation of the Carriage by Air of Korean Commercial Code is different from the provisions of the Montreal Convention is respect of the liability of the carrier in the carriage of cargo by air as follows : the draft Article 913 paragraph 1 provides additionally the riot, civil war and quarantine as the exoneration causes from the liability for damage to the cargo of the carrier in the Article 18 paragraph 2 of the Montreal Convention. In respect of the liability of the carrier in carriage of cargo by air, the draft legislation of Part VI the Carriage by Air does not provide the settlement by arbitration of dispute relating to the liability of the carrier and the requirement of adequate insurance covering the liability of the carrier which are provided in the Montreal Convention. In author's opinion, it is desirable that the above mentioned provisions such as the arbitration and the insurance shall be inserted into the draft legislation of the Carriage by Air of Korean Commercial Code. In conclusion, the legislation of Part VI the Carriage by Air of the Korean Commercial Code shall be made by the National Assembly as soon as possible for the smooth and equitable compensation for damage to cargo arising during the carriage by air.

• International Commerce and Information Review
• /
• v.15 no.4
• /
• pp.457-479
• /
• 2013

Through a Chinese rise, Chinese dream is actualizing as the world's great power. According to outlook of World Bank and IMF, Around 2030 China will be a great power bigger than America's economic power. The rise of China will give a huge impact to the whole world. China expands her influence through a global manufacturing base and a global market. To actualize 'Peaceful Rise' Strategy, China has many constraints. Chinese society is facing many difficult social problem due to side effects of a rapid development. Such as the spread of corruption, the severity of wealth gap, environmental degradation and energy shortage. Internationally there are containment from hegemon so-called 'China threat' dispute, Taiwan issue and territorial disputes. Western countries are hostile to China for two reasons. Based on expectations, one is China's socialist system and the other is the rising China which will compete for supremacy with Europe and America. Recent emergence of Chinese nationalism and the containment of the neighboring countries are also serious limiting factors. Domestically they have the rampant corruption in the bureaucracy, weakened capacity of Communist rule, wealth disparity due to the discriminatory economic development strategy, seriousness of rural problem, social instability, lack of social security systems and the development gap between the eastern coastal areas and western inland areas, ethnic minorities problems, the constraint of sustainable development issues due to lack of resources, environmental pollution and energy constraints. Like the former Soviet Union, China may face a dismantlement. After the rise, China may encounter possibilities of a war between great powers or a collapse of Chinese society caused by deepening internal conflict. Serious economic polarization would make peasants and urban workers, who are social vulnerable people, to turn their back to communist party and threaten the justification and the appropriateness of the ruling communist party. Chinese government will think internal system security threat is more formidable risk factor than a system security threat from the hegemon. The decline of great country comes from internal reasons rather than external reasons. To achieve peaceful rise, unification with Taiwan is an essential prerequisite. Taiwan issues are complex problems which equipped with international and domestic factors. Lack of energy resources, environmental pollution in China will bring economic crisis to Korean enterprises. Important influence to Korean economy will be a changeover of the method in economic development. It will turn the balance of investment and consumption, GDP-centered growth to consumption and environment-centered growth. Services industries including finance, environment, culture, education, health care and social welfare will grow. Change in China's growth model will give a great challenge upon the intermediate goods industry in Korea. Korea should reduce the portion of machinery, automotive, semiconductor, steel and chemical-centered export industry to China, and should increase the proportion of the service industry.