• 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
• /
• 제29권4호
• /
• pp.121-140
• /
• 2019

China, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan have a singular political relationship. This distinctive relationship creates a unique impact on the nationality of the arbitral awards among the said countries. Each of these regions does not adopt the arbitral award of the other party as either a foreign arbitration award or a domestic arbitration award, but separately adopts the arbitral award in different jurisdictions within the same country. Therefore, in order to approve and enforce their arbitral awards in other areas, they have no choice to apply special laws or the conventions concluded between them, neither the New York Convention nor the individual arbitration laws in those areas. Therefore, this paper reviewed the convention and self-established laws among China, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan regarding the approval and execution of the other arbitral awards. In addition, the domestic laws in China, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan are compared with the New York Convention to ascertain the criteria for distinguishing domestic and foreign arbitral awards. This study also compared and analyzed what criteria were established for the determination of the nationality of the arbitral awards in the domestic law or the convention concluded in pan China. Through the analysis of these contents, the characteristics and problems of criterion for the determination of nationality among China, Hong Kong, Macao, and Taiwan were identified. Based on the results, this study examined the precautions Korean companies entering these regions should use in the arbitration system in these areas.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제29권4호
• /
• pp.165-186
• /
• 2019

The parties are jointly and severally liable to pay to the arbitrators such reasonable fees and expenses (if any) as are appropriate in the circumstances. Any party may apply to the court (upon notice to the other parties and to the arbitrators) which may order that the amount of the arbitrators' fees and expenses shall be considered and adjusted by such means and upon such terms as it may direct. Arbitrators' fees and expenses are calculated on the basis of informal time fees determined by the arbitrators themselves, and the fees and expenses also vary greatly depending on the nature of the case. Obviously, when appointing a member of the LMAA as an arbitrator, it is rare to negotiate the fees and expenses with the arbitrator and to make specific arrangements for the fees and expenses. And it is common for between an arbitrator and a party to have an arbitrator agreement only in accordance with LMAA Terms. And it is common for between an arbitrator and a party to have an arbitrator agreement only in accordance with LMAA Terms. The purpose of this study analyzes the structure of arbitrators' fees and expenses under the UK Arbitration Act and LMAA Terms 2017. The contents can be divided into the relationship between the arbitrator and the parties (the claim of fees, the type of fees) and the relationship between the parties(the burden rate of arbitrators' fees). In this regard, this study suggests the implications after comparatively analyzing the UK Arbitration Act and the LMAA Terms 2017.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제29권4호
• /
• pp.33-55
• /
• 2019

This study is aimed at drawing up improvement measures in connection with the resolution of claims, one of the major constraints in revitalizing South-North Korean economic cooperation. To that end, we first looked at the structure of South-North Korean economic cooperation and the institutional status related to resolving the claims. Also we analyzed the current status of the claims in the process of promoting South-North Korean economic cooperation by companies and the provisions of the claims between the parties in order to derive any problems. Through these research results, we were able to identify directions and implications for efficient improvement of the causes of several South-North Korean economic cooperation claims. First, at the corporate level, there is a need to create specific details of a contract for resolving disputes and to add additional third-party coordination functions in the relevant clause of the contract in preparation for the occurrence of a dispute. In addition, it is necessary to seek ways to advance jointly with corporations in China and other third countries in order to secure stability. Second, the government should continue to discuss ways of promoting South-North Korean commercial arbitration with North Korea so that follow-up measures can be completed as soon as possible. In addition, a two-track strategy is suggested to provide a practical negotiation channel at the private level. Also it is necessary to be active in persuading North Korea to join the international arbitration treaty in preparation for the activation of full-fledged economic exchanges.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제30권1호
• /
• pp.39-66
• /
• 2020

Under the doctrine of separability, if the party did not specifically challenge the validity of the arbitration clause, then it is presumed valid, and arbitrators would still have authority to adjudicate disputes within the scope of the arbitration clause. Further, the Primerica and Spahr decisions address whether a court or an arbitrator should adjudicate a claim that a contract containing an arbitration clause is void ab initio due to mental incapacity. If the arbitration agreement is separable, as was found in Primerica, then the "making" of the agreement is not at issue when the challenge is directed at the entire contract and arbitrators may exercise authority. If an arbitration provision is not separable from the underlying contract, as in Spahr, a defense of mental incapacity necessarily goes against both the entire contract and the arbitration agreement, so the "making" of the agreement to arbitrate is at issue, and the claim is for courts to decide. Although no bright line rule can be established to deal with challenges of lack of mental capacity to an arbitration agreement, the rule in Prima Paint should not be extended to this defense. Extending the rule in Prima Paint would force an individual with a mental incapacity to elect between challenging the entire contract and challenging arbitration. Accordingly, there should be a special set of rules outside of the context of Prima Paint to address the situation of status-based defenses, specifically mental capacity defenses, to contracts containing arbitration provisions.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제25권1호
• /
• pp.87-105
• /
• 2015

Intellectual property law is slowly fighting to keep pace with the rapid growth of the fashion industry. Copyright and patent law have proven only minimally effective in fashion, even in the US and other top fashion nations, forcing designers and fashion companies to rely on their trademarks to protect their work. Litigating trademark disputes in the fashion industry presents a host of problems as witnessed in a recent Christian Louboutin case, leading the parties to resort to Alternative Dispute Resolution(ADR) and Online Dispute Resolution(ODR). ADR methods, especially arbitration, are increasingly emerging as substitutes to litigation. Using these methods, the fashion industry (CFDA in the US case) should sincerely consider a self-regulating program in which its members, both fashion designers and corporations alike, can resolve disputes in a manner mutually beneficial to all parties in order to preserve the industry's growth, solidarity, and esteem In particular, for the US fashion industry, the ongoing Innovative Design Protection and Privacy Prevention Act(IDPPPA) anti-counterfeit legislation could have caused a chilling effect against innovation. New designers with no name and less resources who could normally flourish producing inspired-by designs may find themselves subject to copyright infringement legislation since the IDPPPA may expand the protection of established designers and brands with more resources. This fear and its implication could be solved by the fashion industry itself since fashion experts know best how to handle these fast-paced issues arising in the field. Therefore, stakeholders in the fashion industry should commit to protecting innovation within fashion on a long-term basis by establishing a panel handling an ADR process. This can mitigate the uncertainty created by the IDPPPA or any other legislation from elsewhere, which could result in a shying away from experimentation with inspired-by designs.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제26권2호
• /
• pp.67-89
• /
• 2016

An ADR arbitration system has a necessary value in the sports industry for settlement of disputes. Sports disputes should be resolved independently by enacting internal regulations within the basic principles of national law rather than treated as a civil action. If the dispute is not fair and transparent, it may cause distrust. Because an arbitration system has values such as speed, flexibility of economic decisions, professionalism of arbitrator and confidentiality of arbitration-related information, the efficiency of the arbitration system for conflict resolution has emerged recently. We have to assign sports experts to reactivate sports arbitration commission committees which existed from 2006 to 2009 in Korea. Many countries, such as the UK, USA, Canada, New Zealand, Hungary, the Netherlands, Poland, Germany, and Japan, which attain advancement of sports and the International Court of Arbitration establish and run their own sports arbitration agencies. However, Korea disbanded its sports arbitration commission committee for political and economic reasons. In 2012, after their disbanding, athlete Kim Yeon-kyoung came into conflict with Heungkuk Life over terms of free agent acquisition and international transfer certification. Finally they were able to settle those political conflicts. However if there had been related laws in Korea, they could have resolved those problems easily without international disputes. Practically, it would have been almost impossible for Kim Yeon-kyoung to win the dispute. But her problem became an issue after the London Olympics, so she could win. Although it is well for her to take an active role on the international stage, it left much to be desired on account of the intervention of political circles in order to resolve the conflict. If the sports arbitration commission committee in Korea had still been active, it could have come to a peaceful settlement domestically. Therefore we have to reestablish a Korean sports arbitration committee centered around experts of sports law.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제25권3호
• /
• pp.59-90
• /
• 2015

Since 1855, the federal courts of the United States have been empowered to assist in the gathering of evidence for use before foreign tribunals. Today, the source of that authority is 28 U.S.C. ${\S}1782$ which permits the courts to order a person "to give [ ] testimony... or to produce a document ... for use in a proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal${\cdots}$ ." It was generally assumed, until the United States Supreme Court's decision of Intel Corp. v. Advanced Micro Devices, Inc. in 2004, that arbitration tribunals were not "foreign tribunals" for purposes of 28 U.S.C. ${\S}1782$. While the issue in Intel did not involve an arbitration tribunal, a statement by the Supreme Court in dicta has called into question the exact parameters of the words "foreign tribunal," resulting in a split of opinion among the federal courts of the United States. This article explores the legislative history of 28 U.S.C. ${\S}1782$, examines the United States Supreme Court decision in Intel, and discusses the split among the courts of the United States regarding the interpretation of "foreign tribunal." The article further surveys emerging issues: is an arbitration tribunal in a case involving foreign parties and seated in the United States a "foreign tribunal"; does agreeing to the use of the IBA Rules on the Taking of Evidence in International Arbitration circumscribe the use of 28 U.S.C. ${\S}1782$; can a party be ordered to produce documents located outside the United States; and is there a role for judicial estoppel in determining whether an application pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ${\S}1782$ should be granted?

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제26권2호
• /
• pp.27-44
• /
• 2016

The use of program formats has slowly but surely developed into an important component of the television industry. This article examines the surprising gap between the constantly growing, multi-billion-dollar trade of program formats and their unclear and contradictory legal treatment. From both the social and commercial standpoints, television formats are valuable creations. Understanding the two products, the paper and program stages, of a television format and their respective markets, is fundamental to discussions of its legal protection. Interestingly, under current law, the less-developed stages of the process (program ideas and paper formats) are awarded more protection than the aired program format, which accumulates higher levels of investment, creativity, and expression. Internal industry mechanisms, such as vertical integration, damage to reputation, and industry institutions, exist in both markets and are still able to control and influence members' behavior to some extent. However, while the influence of internal industry mechanisms is still strong in the paper format market, in the program format market, which continues to grow, such mechanisms have weakened, amplifying the importance of a clear legal system. The absence of protection will certainly not completely eliminate the production of new program formats. However, these factors do not add up to a case against protection. The changes in the program format market in the last two decades support the theory that the overall effect of providing legal protection for TV formats would promote beneficial competition and encourage more original creations. The underlying question for television formats should not be whether to protect but rather how.

• 대한간호학회지
• /
• 제20권1호
• /
• pp.79-87
• /
• 1990

Clinical and epedemiologic studies of coronary heart disease(CHD)have from time to time over the last three decades found associations between prevalence of CHD and behavioral attributes and cigarette smoking. The main purpose of this study is reduced to major risk factor of coronary heart disease through prohibition of smoking and control of behavior pattern. The subjects consisted of 120 smokers and 90 non-smokers who were married men older than 30 years working in officers. The officers were surveyed by means of questionnaire September 26 through October 6, 1989. The Instruments used for this study was a self-administered measurement tool composed of 59 items was made through modifications of Jenkuns Activity Survery(JAS). The Data were analysed by SAS(Statistical Analsis System) program personal computer. The statistical technique used for this study were Frequency, x$^2$-test, t-test, ANOVA, Pearson Correlation Coefficient. The 15 items were chosen with items above 0.3 of the factor loading in the factor analysis. In the first factor analysis 19 factors were extracted and accounted for 86% of the total variance. However when the number of factors were limited to 3 in order to derive Jenkins classification, three factors were derived. There names are Job-Involvement, Speed & Impatience, Hard-Driving. Each of them includes 21 items, 21 and 9, respectively. The results of this study were as follow : 1. The score of the smoker group and non-smoker group in Job-Involvement(t＝5.7147, p＜0.0001), Speed & Impatience(t＝4.6756, p＜.0001), Hard-Driving(t＝8.0822, p＜.0001) and total type A behavior pattern showed statistically significant differences(t＝8.1224, p＜.0001). 2. The score of type A behavior pattern by number of cigarettes smoked daily were not statistically significant differences. 3. The score of type A behavior pattern by duration of smoking were not significant differences. It was concluded that the relationship between smokers and non - smokers of type A behavior pattern was statistically significant difference but number of cigarettes smoked daily and duration of smoking were not significant differences. Therefore this study is needed to adequate nursing intervention of type A behavior pattern in order to elevated to educational effect for prohibition of cigarette smoking.