• International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security
• /
• 제22권12호
• /
• pp.125-131
• /
• 2022

The diversity and complexity of criminal, administrative and civil cases resolved by the courts makes it difficult to develop universal automated tools for the analysis and evaluation of justice. However, big data generated in the scope of justice gives hope that this problem will be resolved as soon as possible. The big data applying makes it possible to identify typical options for resolving cases, form detailed rules for the individualization of a court decision, and correlate these rules with an abstract provisions of law. This approach allows us to somewhat overcome the contradiction between the abstract and the concrete in law, to automate the analysis of justice and to model e-justice for scientific and practical purposes. The article presents the results of using dimension reduction, SHAP value, and p-value to identify, analyze and evaluate the individualization of justice and the differentiation of legal regulation. Processing and analysis of arrays of court decisions by computational methods make it possible to identify the typical views of courts on questions of fact and questions of law. This knowledge, obtained automatically, is promising for the scientific study of justice issues, the improvement of the prescriptions of the law and the probabilistic prediction of a court decision with a known set of facts.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권1호
• /
• pp.161-184
• /
• 2020

In the process of the annulment of arbitral awards, the Swiss Federal Supreme Court contributes to keeping Switzerland as a venue for international arbitration. Challenges to an award rendered in Switzerland are handled by the Swiss Supreme Court only. Furthermore, the Swiss law provides extremely limited grounds (PILA 190) for the potential challenge of the award and those are different from what model law countries have. For example, violations of the parties' agreed procedural arrangements will not be grounds for the annulment of an award in Swiss. In arbitration, the intervention of a national court is necessary to protect justice but at the same time, it can impede the process of arbitration, even making it useless. Limited intervention of the Swiss Supreme Court protects the efficiency, autonomy, and justice of international arbitration. International Arbitration has to be simple and fast to solve complex international commercial problems and to promote trade. Therefore, the process and technique to be applied on an Arbitration-friendly Swiss court should be considered.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제33권3호
• /
• pp.147-175
• /
• 2023

The emergence of the metaverse, a complex three-dimensional virtual environment, has led to significant changes in the intellectual property (IP) landscape. This paper examines the challenges and legal intricacies of IP within the virtual realm, focusing on the unprecedented nature of these disputes and on the inadequacies of traditional jurisdiction methods. Drawing from international frameworks, including the International Law Association's Guidelines and WIPO's guides, the study critically explores arbitration as an alternate approach to metaverse IP disputes, analyzing its complexities and applicability. The paper further delves into challenges arising from diverse protection laws that pertain to the global nature of the metaverse, including the nuances of various digital assets like NFTs. By assessing jurisdictional difficulties, the paper addresses the adoption of decentralized justice platforms, and examines the role of Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) methods, this paper presents a comprehensive view of the evolving virtual legal field. It suggests that while innovative methods are emerging, traditional arbitration will likely remain the preferred choice for complex disputes, offering a balance of speed, cost-effectiveness, and legal robustness within the virtual world.

• International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security
• /
• 제22권11호
• /
• pp.229-235
• /
• 2022

This study aims to substantiate an interdisciplinary methodology for automated analysis and qualitative assessment of legislation and court decisions. The development of this kind of methodology will make it possible to fill a number of methodological gaps in various research areas, including law effectiveness assessment and legal monitoring. We have defined a methodology based on the interdisciplinary principles and tools. In general, it should be noted that even at the level of qualitative assessment made with the use of the methodology described above, the accumulation of knowledge about the relationship between legal objectives, indicators and computer methods of their identification can reduce the role of expert knowledge and subjective factor in the process of assessment, planning, forecasting and control over the state of legislation and law enforcement. Automation of intellectual processes becomes inevitable in a digital society, but, releasing experts from routine work, simultaneously reorients it to development of interdisciplinary methods and control over their application.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제24권2호
• /
• pp.139-161
• /
• 2009

필자가 세계에서 최초로 국제항공우주재판소(ICASL)의 설립을 제안한 것은 어디까지나 필자 개인의 학문적이고 실용적인 의견에 불과하다. 항공기, 인공위성, 우주선의 추락 또는 충돌 등으로 인하여 인적 또는 물적 손해가 발생되는 항공우주사고의 특성은 (1)전손성(全損性: all or nothing), (2) 순간성(Augenblick), (3) 지상종속성(항공우주관제계 등), (4)손해의 거액성, (5) 국제성 등이 있음으로 육상의 자동차, 기차사고 등과 해상의 선박사고 등과는 다른 특성을 지니고 있다. 따라서 국제항공우주법분야의 사건들을 신속하고 공정하게 처리하기 위하여서는 지역(대륙)별로 국제항공우주법분야에 조예가 깊은 전문가, 교수 및 법조인들 가운데 UN산하 국제민간항공기관(ICAO)의 이사회 및 총회와 UN우주평화적이용위원회(COPUOS)의 법률분과위원회 및 총회에서 다수결로 선출된 14명의 판사들로 구성된 국제항공우주재판소의 설립이 필요하다. 현재 국제재판소로는 네덜란드 헤이그에 있는 (1) 국제사법재판소(ICJ), 독일 함부르크에 있는 (2) 국제해양재판소(ITLS), 헤이그에 있는 (3) 국제형사재판소(ICC), 룩셈브르크에 있는 (4) 유럽공동체재판소(CEC)와 프랑스의 스트라스부르크에 있는 (5) 유럽인권재판소(EHRC) 등이 있으며 이들 재판소의 기능을 개별적으로 살피어 볼 때에 주로 국제법, 국제해양법, 국제형사법, EU법, 유럽인권법 등에 관련된 사건들을 재판한 후 판결을 내리고 있다. 상기 5개 재판소의 설립근거는 각 재판소의 설립에 관계된 국제조약 내지 제정법(statute :정관)에 근거하고 있다. 상기 국제항공우주재판소의 설립 근거가 되는 조약초안에는 (1) 본 재판소의 설립목적, (2) 판사의 선출방법, (3)판사의 임기, (4) 판사의 의무와 권한, (5) 심의회, (6) 재판관할, (7) 청문회, (9) 판결의 방법(주문과 이유 등), (10) 제소기한 등을 삽입하여야만 된다. 국제항공우주재판소는 ICAO 및 UNCOPUOS의 주된 사법기관으로서 법인격을 향유하며 9년 임기의 판사들은 재선이 가능하다. 국제항공우주재판소의 소재지는 대한민국의 서울 또는 기타 도시로 한다. 국제항공우주재판소를 설립하기 위하여서는 설립근거가 되는 국제조약과 세부적인 절차법 (정관: 定款등)의 제정이 필요하다고 본다. 국제항공우주재판소의 설립은 항공우주법 사건에 대한 재판의 기준을 설정하고 재판의 공정성과 신속성을 도모하는데 크게 기여하게 되리라고 본다. 국제항공우주재판소의 창설은 판례법의 축적으로 인하여 국제항공우주법을 통일을 시키는데 촉매적인 역할을 하게 될 것이며 "세계통일법 (unification of the law in the world)"을 형성시키는데 일익을 담당하게 될 것이다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제68권
• /
• pp.43-63
• /
• 2015

The number of final appeal(the rate of final appeal: 43%) has been on the increase every year over the past ten years in Korea. The number of final appeal cases given to a justice of the Korean Supreme Court amounts to nearly one everyday, which makes it vulnerable to faulty decisions. Reversal rate of final appeal is as low as 10% with most of the cases being dismissed and hence the percentage of people having trust in the judiciary is merely 27%. In this context, the Korean judiciary has announced its plan to set up a final appellate court in the Supreme Court. The establishment of final appellate court, however, is not only against the Constitution but also hardly seen in other nations. It would only overexpand the Supreme Court. Furthermore, the final appellate court would end up deteriorating into the court of fourth instance and impose extra burden on the government as well as on the disputing parties. Therefore, it is necessary to upgrade the quality of the court by increasing the number of judges in the lower court and let them focus on the fact finding process. Facilitating the ADR(Alternative Dispute Resolution) process such as arbitration would help improve the structure of the judiciary. The incompatibility among the four values of the dispute resolution process(equitability, truth, quickness and efficiency) calls for building comprehensive judicial system in which disputes are settled by choosing either jurisprudence or utility.

• Journal of Korea Trade
• /
• 제27권1호
• /
• pp.176-191
• /
• 2023

Purpose - When recovered through arbitration a contractual penalty that is disproportionately high can become grounds for challenging an arbitral award or an obstacle to its enforcement within Russian jurisdiction. This article investigates how violation of the principle of proportionality can affect the enforcement and challenging of arbitral awards in Russia. Based on the examination of the current legislation, along with the analysis of recent court cases on the subject, the ultimate object of this article is to discern practical recommendations for Korean practitioners who are looking to challenge and/or enforce arbitral awards in Russian courts. Design/methodology - The research process included the reviewing of current Russian legislation conducted in concurrence with academic literature review, searching and analyzing recent court cases where the relevant legal provisions and concepts were applied, and formulating practical implications of the research at its final stage. Findings - Through its relation to the principle of fairness/justice the authors establish the connection between the principle of proportionality and the public policy of Russia. Analysis of recent court cases showed two conflicting trends of whether a disproportionate penalty can be considered a public policy violation. The authors offer practical recommendations on how to substantiate a relevant claim regarding contractual penalty reduction by the court, depending on the desired outcome. Originality/value - The article contains an up-to-date summary of the legal provisions on the principle of proportionality of civil liability in Russia and identifies the most recent trends in court practice on the issue that is not covered by existing studies.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제27권1호
• /
• pp.3-35
• /
• 2017

For recent years, several disputes between Korean consumers and multinational companies have arisen. Since the disputes were big and material that children's safety was at issue, a question started if Korean law properly has protected consumers' rights against multinational companies. While the Korean legal society tried to legislate punitive compensation with this concern, the U.S. Supreme Court reached an interesting case law regarding consumer contracts. A recent trend on consumer contracts in the United States shows that general terms have arbitration clause with class action waiver. As much as international arbitration has worked as the most effective resolution in international commercial disputes, the concept is still foreign and the experts are not approachable to lay individual consumers. However, class action in arbitration can hugely help for lay individual consumers to bring a case before arbitration tribunal. California courts consistently showed the analysis that the practical impact of prohibiting class action in arbitration clause is to ban lay individual consumers from fighting for their rights. However, the Supreme Court held that the arbitration clause shall be enforced as parties agree even if consumers practically cannot fight for their rights in the end. Even though consumer contracts are a typical example of lack of parity and of adhesive contract, the Supreme Court still applies liberalism that parties are equal in power and free to agree. This case law has a crucial implication since Korean consumers buy goods and services from the U.S. and other countries in everyday life. Accordingly, they are deemed to agree on the dispute resolution clauses, which might violate their constitutional right to bring their cases before the adjudication tribunal. This issue could be more important than adopting punitive compensation because consumers' rights are not necessarily governed by Korean law but by the governing law of the general terms and conditions chosen and written by the multinational companies. Thus this paper studies and analyzes the practical reality of international arbitration and influence of arbitration clause with class action waiver with the U.S. Supreme Court and California case laws.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제32권2호
• /
• pp.3-31
• /
• 2017

지난 2017년 10월 12일 영국 고등법원(Royal Courts of Justice)은 항공기 운항지연에 따른 항공사의 보상책임에 관하여 판단하였다. 2건의 사건이 병합된 사안에서 원고인 승객들은 영국 리버풀을 출발하여 아랍에미레이트의 두바이를 경유하여 각각의 목적지인 방콕과 시드니로 가기 위해 피고 항공사와 운송계약을 체결하였다. 사안에서 최종 목적지에 승객이 연착되었는지 여부를 판단함에 있어서 연결편을 포함하는 전체 항공여정이 고려되어야 한다는 원고측의 주장에 대해 피고 항공사는 첫 번째 항공편에 발생한 연착만이 항공사의 책임을 판정하는 고려의 대상이 되어야 한다고 주장하였다. 결국 이러한 다툼은 유럽연합(EU)의 항공소비자 보호에 관한 Regulation (EC) No. 261/2004의 적용범위에 관한 것이었다. 즉, 첫 번째 항공운송은 EU지역의 공항을 이륙한 항공편이었고, 두 번째 항공운송은 EU가 아닌 다른 지역에서 운항되었고 더욱이 해당 운송인이 EU에서 설립된 항공사가 아니므로 환승 이후의 항공운송에 관해서는 Regulation 261의 적용이 배제되므로 규정된 금전보상의무가 인정될 수 없다고 피고 항공사가 주장하였던 것이다. 본 논문은 이와 같이 연결편에 의한 항공운송 계약의 이행에서 발생한 지연에 관한 Regulation 261의 적용범위가 문제되었던 사례와 유럽연합사법법원(Court of Justice of the European Union, CJEU)의 판례를 검토할 목적에서 기술되었다. 해당 사례를 연구하는 것은 우리 국민과 항공사에게 시사하는 바가 적지 않다. 우선 Regulation 261 규정에 따라, EU지역을 출발하는 모든 항공사를 이용하는 승객은 동 규정의 적용대상에 포함되므로 EU를 출발하는 우리 국적사들은 Regulation의 직접 적용을 받게 된다. 비록 지리적인 이유로 유럽을 출발하여 우리나라를 경유해서 타국으로 환승하는 여객이 사안에서 문제가 되었던 중동지역과 비교할 때 절대적으로 많지는 않을 것으로 생각되지만, 해당 규정의 의미와 판례동향은 분명히 참고가 필요할 것으로 본다. 나아가 그 서문에서 천명하고 있는 바와 같이 Regulation 261은 기본적으로 항공운송인 보다 소비자인 여객의 권리보호에 친화적인 판례를 다수 도출하고 있는 바, 우리나라의 항공소비자 보호를 위한 법제연구에도 본 연구는 좋은 참고가 될 수 있을 것으로 본다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제16권1호
• /
• pp.3-44
• /
• 2006

Arbitration, which involves a final determination of disputes, has elements of the judicial process. Although an alternative to formal court litigation, it does not replace it in all aspect, but rather coexists with court procedure as an adjunct and part of administering justice. As the international trade has the basic problems of business managed between the parties of other countries having different laws, customs, cultures, currencies and religions. It has been known that these defects caused the commercial disputes and suspended economic fluence in world economic development through the foreign business. The United Nations launched 'the United Nations Convention on the Enforcement and Recognition of the Foreign Arbitral Awards' in 1958 to give effect to the international commercial arbitration. However, the convention has the limitation in excluding the legal obstacles originated from domestic arbitration systems of every states. As the result, the UN succeeded in making world wide arbitration law named 'The UN Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration' in 1983 and recommended all member countries to accept it to revise their domestic arbitration laws thereafter. Korea revised national arbitration law accepting 100% of the model law in 2000. In this respect korea became to have the international dispute settlement system. Korea will be able to settle more business disputes arisen from the international trade and enjoy the world credibility through the new arbitration system.