• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제32권3호
• /
• pp.29-46
• /
• 2022

Until recently, there has been a circuit split as to whether parties to foreign private arbitral proceedings could seek assistance from the U.S. courts for discovery pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1782. The circuit courts have differed on the issue of whether a private arbitral proceeding may be considered a "proceeding in a foreign or international tribunal" in terms of the statute, which would ultimately allow or disallow judicial assistance in taking of evidence by the U.S. district courts for use in the requested proceedings. While the U.S. Supreme Court has addressed the applicability of §1782 in its Intel decision in 2004, it had not established a test as to what constitutes a foreign or international tribunal for the purposes of §1782, thereby leaving it open for lower courts to continue to interpret §1782 in their own ways, as requests for judicial assistance in taking of evidence are filed. In the recent decision of ZF Auto. US, Inc., v. Luxshare, Ltd., the Supreme Court has finally clarified that in order for an arbitral panel to be a "foreign or international tribunal" under §1782, such panels must exercise governmental authority conferred by one nation or multiple nations. Therefore, private commercial arbitral panels are not "foreign or international tribunal(s)" for the purposes of §1782 because they do not constitute governmental or intergovernmental adjudicative bodies. Such holding is necessary and legitimate for interested parties in international arbitration, as well as, potential parties of arbitration who are contemplating alternative dispute resolution for their dispute(s).

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.519-546
• /
• 2004

On June 27, 2002 Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) launched dot-ca domain name dispute resolution service through BCICAC and Resolution Canada, Inc. The Domain name Dispute Resolution Policy (CDRP) of CIRA is basically modelled after Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy(UDRP), while the substance of CDRP is slightly modified to meet the need of Canadian domain name regime and its legal system. Firstly, this article examined CIRA's domain name dispute resolution policy in general. It is obvious that the domain name dispute resolution proceeding is non-binding arbitration to which arbitration law does not apply. However it still belongs to the arbitration and far from the usual mediation process. Domain name arbitrators render decision rather than assist disputing parties themselves reach to agreement. In this respect the domain name arbitration is similar to arbitration or litigation rather than mediation. Secondly it explored how the panels applied the substantive standards in domain name arbitration. There is some criticism that panelists interprets the test of "confusingly similar" in conflicting manner. As a result critics assert that courts' judicial review is necessary to reduce the conflicting interpretation on the test of substantive standards stipulated in paragraph 3 of CDRP. Finally, it analysed the court's position on domain name arbitral award. Canadian courts do not seem to establish a explicit standard for judicial review over it yet. However, in Black v. Molson case Ontario Superior Court applied the UDRP rules in examining the WIPO panel's decision, while US courts often apply domestic patent law and ACPA(Anticyber -squatting Consumer's Protection Act) to review domain name arbitration decision rather than UDRP rules. In conclusion this article suggests that courts should restrict their judicial review on domain name administrative panel's decision at best. This will lead to facilitating the use of ADR in domain name dispute resolution and reducing the burden of courts' dockets.

• 대한토목학회논문집
• /
• 제26권1D호
• /
• pp.115-123
• /
• 2006

최근 국내 건설계약 문화가 선진화 되어가고 클레임 발생 건수가 증가함에 따라 클레임 관리의 중요성이 부각되고 있다. 선진 외국의 경우 분쟁 예방 및 건설 분쟁에 따른 문제점을 최소화하기 위한 클레임 관리 기법의 개발 및 클레임 자료의 데이터베이스화 방안에 관한 연구가 지속적으로 이루어져 왔으나, 국내의 경우 최근 클레임 발생 건수의 급속한 증가 추세에도 불구하고 이에 대한 연구는 매우 미흡한 실정이다. 본 연구의 목적은 클레임 판례/사례, 유권해석 및 법률조항의 분석을 통해 규명된 원인요소를 중심으로 클레임의 예방과 해결을 위한 분류체계 및 알고리즘을 개발하고, 웹 및 데이터베이스 기술을 활용하여 건설 프로젝트 참여 주체들이 자신의 클레임 사안들을 보다 쉽게 분석하고 예방과 해결을 위한 의사결정을 지원할 수 있도록 하는 전산화 시스템을 개발하는 것이다. 개발 시스템의 활용을 통해 건설 프로젝트 참여 주체는 클레임 판례/사례, 유권해석, 법률조항, 책임관계 및 타당성 등을 체계적으로 분석하여 예측 가능한 클레임을 사전에 대비하고 발생된 클레임 사안에 효과적으로 대처하여 클레임 처리 업무의 효율성을 향상시킬 수 있을 것으로 기대된다.

• Journal of Korean Neurosurgical Society
• /
• 제61권4호
• /
• pp.474-477
• /
• 2018

Objective : From November 30, 2016, the Korean Government carried the revised Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Act into effect. Mediation will start automatically without agreements of the defendant, when the outcome of the patient was death, coma more than a month or severe disability. Cerebral aneurysm has a definite risk of bad outcome, especially in the worst condition. Any surgical intervention to this lesion has its own high risk of complications. Recently, Seoul central district court decided 50% responsibility of the doctors who made a rupture of the aneurysm during coiling (2015Ga-Dan5243104). We reviewed judicial precedents related to cerebral aneurysms in lawsuit using a web search. Methods : We searched judicial precedents at a web search of the Supreme Court, using the key words, "cerebral aneurysm". Results : There were 15 precedents, six from the Supreme Court, seven from the High Court, and two from district courts. Seven precedents were related to the causation analysis, such as work-relationship. Five precedents were malpractice suits related bad results or complications. Remaining three precedents were related to the insurance payment. In five malpractice precedents, two precedents of the Supreme Court reversed former two precedents of the High Court. Conclusion : Judicial precedents on the cerebral aneurysm included not only malpractice suits, but also causation analysis or insurance payment. Attention to these subjects is needed. We also need education of the independent medical examination. To avoid medical disputes, shared decision making seems to be useful, especially in cases of high risk condition or procedures.

• International Journal of Computer Science & Network Security
• /
• 제22권8호
• /
• pp.420-424
• /
• 2022

The Arab Automotive Company was the first corporation in Saudi Arabia and was founded in 1928. Since then, the number of Saudi corporations had increased. In 1985, Tadawul (The Saudi Stock Exchange ) was instituted under the supervision of the Saudi Arabian Monetary Authority (SAMA) and the base value of the index was 1000. This decision came as a response to accelerated growth in the number of Saudi corporations which had increased during the 1970s as the Saudi's economy developed.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제14권2호
• /
• pp.107-133
• /
• 2004

In these days, arbitration helps alleviate some of the burden of a heavy caseload from the judiciary and is a viable method to resolve disputes in a relatively quick and efficient manner. An award of punitive damages is often the most significant and detrimental part of an award arising from a judicial or arbitral proceeding. In 1995, the United States Supreme Court resolved a circuit split. upholding an arbitral panel's authority to award punitive damages under a securities arbitration agreement. This decision was monumental in establishing arbitral power. However, it left several questions unanswered. For example, which, if any, standards should be applied to such awards？ The decision in Sawtelle, adopting a separate ground for review of punitive damages awards, is one that signals a significant change in the field of arbitration. This article addresses the reviewability of punitive damages awards arising out of a securities arbitration hearing. It would be necessary to introduce securities arbitration system to our disputes resolution system. Compared to American practices, there could be many differences in recognition on arbitration and legal structure in our country. Thus it will be a future assignment to consider seriously and carefully what kind of securities arbitration system will be proper for us. This article analyzed predispute arbitration agreements and agreements to arbitrate after a dispute has already arisen.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제23권1호
• /
• pp.153-175
• /
• 2013

The issue of patent validity becomes a subject of dispute under the FTA and there is a definite difference of opinion between China, Japan, and Korea. In other words, the validity of a judgment on the patent was exclusively under the jurisdiction of the administrative agency at a particular patent office. Thus, the issue arises where there is a potential judgment on patent validity. In this case, the Supreme Court rather than the patent office can offer a judgment from a judicial institution and can make a judgment in the case of a medication. In China, however, the lowest possibility of judgment on patent validity is predicted to occur in judicial institutions. Such a judgment is recognized as the Grand Bench Decision in Korea, and the court can judge the patent validation rather than the patent office. That is just the case in the Kilby case-it is invalid for reasons obvious in Japan. Therefore, there is a substantial difference between the three countries. Especially in Japan, where after the Kilby case, they revised the patent law in 2004 to introduce Article 104-3, placing the judgment of patent validity in the court, even if the "Apparentness"is not requisite. Per this law, infringers can argue for patent invalidity not only the judgment of the patent invalidation but also the infringement lawsuit. From the point of view of Japan, Korea became the judgment of trademark validation by extension and obvious cases can become directly to judge through the Supreme Court about the right that needs to examinations and registrations. In terms of the mediation, it also provides a clue about the judgment of intellectual property validation and expands the scope of the mediation in the future. From now on, in order to have active mediation procedures in the three countries, China, Japan, and Korea would need to unify regulations and application scopes for mediation in the FTA negotiation and to look forward to achieve a vigorous mediation approach.

• 한국콘텐츠학회논문지
• /
• 제8권12호
• /
• pp.256-263
• /
• 2008

본 연구는 범죄로 인한 사망의 원인을 수사하는 최일선 국가기관인 수사경찰관의 사법부검에 대한 인식을 분석하여 문제점을 파악하고, 정책적 함의를 제시하였다. 본 연구에서는 다음과 같은 정책대안을 도출하였다. 첫째, 유족의 부검동의를 이끌어 내기 위하여 검안의사와 수사경찰이 합동으로 수사 상황과 검안의 결과를 유족의 대표 등에게 설명하는 합동설명의 기회와 사전 유족의 의견수렴의 절차가 필요하다. 둘째, 부검 참관인을 최소화하고, 여성변사자에 대한 특별한 배려가 있어야 할 것이다. 부검의 견학은 반드시 유족의 동의를 얻도록 하고, 외부인의 부검실 출입을 금지하여야 한다. 셋째, 부검절차의 신속을 기하기 위하여 일정한 범위내의 변사체의 경우 사후 영장이 가능한 가이드 라인을 설정하는 것이 필요하다. 또한 유족이 적극적으로 부검을 원하는 경우 가칭 ‘부검요청서’ 등으로 부검이 가능토록 하여야 할 것이다. 끝으로, 부검시행여부에 대하여 현장에서 변사사건을 직접 수사한 경찰과 검찰의 의견이 다른 경우, 검사와 수사경찰이 합동으로 현장 수사 후 부검을 결정하는 절차가 필요하며, 부검은 유족의 의사를 가능한 존중하여 필요한 경우에 한하여 실시해야 할 것이다.

• 한국직업건강간호학회지
• /
• 제6권1호
• /
• pp.23-43
• /
• 1997

The work-related diseases due to continuous overwork are mainly cerebro- and cardio-vascular ones, which is commonly called 'Karoshi', death from overwork. Many factors are capable for Karoshi : occupational stress in relation to technological renovation and industrial rationalization, competitive social structure, and accumulated fatigue accured to long time or irregular working. And its occurence is on the rise. The World Labor Report 1993 released by ILO, pointed out the diseases related to overwork and stress as one of the most important occupational health problem. In Korea, social awareness of Karoshi is at an infant stage, and reliable statistics for its occurence are not compiled in a convenient manner. Despite the rising Karoshi, there are no reliable clauses in workmen's compensation enough to settle down the disputes. Therefore, it is not uncommon that the Labour Ministry and Civil Court find difficulties in reaching an agreement. This study was intended to provide proper compensation and prevention program for workers by suggesting reasonable compensation clauses for the death from overwork. This study consists of two comparative reviews on the compensaton clauses for the death from overwork. One is to review legal standards of Karoshi among three countries, such as Korea, Japan and Taiwan. The other is to investigate the cases of Karoshi in Korea, 121 cases identified at the Labor Welfare Corperation and the Labour Ministrial process of examination and reexamination, and 73 leading cases at the High Court of Justice. The main findings of the study are as follows : 1. Comparisons of comperative review on compensation clauses for the death from overwork among three countries. 1) All of three countries have the same kinds of disease for compensation, which were cerebro-and cardiao-vascular diseases, while for cardiac disease group, Korea has the smaller number of diseases for compensation than Japan. 2) As for the definition of overwork, the three countries share equally that overload for one week prior to collapse is considered as an important factor, but accumulated chronic fatigue is disregarded. 3) As the basis of overwork, in Japan, there is a tendency to move from the conditions of an ordinary healthy adult to those of the individual concerned in Japan, whereas there is no such concern yet in Korea. 4) All the three countries use a common standard of medical judgement in demonstrating causal relationship between a job and a disease. However, Korea is progressive in the sense that in the case of CVA at worksite, the worker himself has no obligation to prove the cause. 2. The results of a comparative review on excutive decisions by Labor Ministry and judicial decisions by the Court in Korea : A judicial decision is based on the legalistic probability, but a excutive decision is not. Therefore, excutive decisions have such restrictions that : 1) TIA (transitory ischemic cerebral attack) and myocarditis are excluded from compensation, and there is little consistency of decision in the case of cause-unknown death. 2) There is a tendency not to compensate for the death from overwork since the work terms such as repeated long-time working, shift work or night-shift work are not considered as overloading. 3) There is a tendency to regard the conditions of a ordinary healthy adult rather than those of the individual concerned(age, existing diseases, health state, etc.) as the comparative basis of overload. 4) There remains a tendency not to compensate for the death from overwork in the case of collapse occuring out of workplace, on the ground of 'on the course of working' and 'in the cause of accident'. Through the study, the fact manifests itself that Korea's compensation clauses for work-related diseases due to overwork are very restrictive. So, it is necessary to extend the Labor Ministry's clauses of compensation for the death from overwork following to the recent changes of other countries and internal judicial decisions. This is very important in the perspective of occupational health that aims at health promotion of workers including prevention of the Karoshi.

• 지적과 국토정보
• /
• 제44권1호
• /
• pp.17-35
• /
• 2014

'토지의 경계에 관한 소송'에 관하여 우리나라 법에는 규정이 없다. 따라서 그 성질, 소송요건, 판단기준 등에 있어서 학설상 논란이 되고 있으며, 향후 이에 관한 법률규정 마련이 필요하다. 이를 위해서는 이에 관한 규정이 완비된 다른 나라의 법률을 비교법적으로 고찰할 필요성이 있다. 본 고에서는 그 첫 번째 작업으로서 로마법 및 중세법 등의 경계확정소송의 연혁을 살펴보고, 나아가 경계확정소송에 대한 법률규정이 비교적 완비된 독일법을 소개한다. 독일법에서는 통상의 소유권 소송과는 별도로, 경계의 입증곤란 혹은 불능을 전제로 하여, 인접 토지의 소유권 분쟁이라고 하는 특수한 장소를 고려한 소송절차로서 경계소송을 규정하고 있다. 이 소송은 1차적으로 진정한 경계를 밝히는 것을 목적으로 하고, 이것이 불가능한 경우에 독일민법(BGB) 제920조의 법정 기준에 따라서 경계를 재량으로 창설한다. 이는 '본래 있는 경계의 발견'만이 아니고, 판결에 의하여 토지소유권의 범위의 창설이 인정되는 것이다. 양자는 법원의 판단작용에서 서로 다른 것이지만, 이 양자를 하나로 포섭한 것이 독일의 경계확정소송이다. 우리 법제에서도 이러한 생각을 참고로 하여 서로 다른 2가지 판단작용을 하나의 소송유형 속에 포함시키는 이론 구성이 필요하다.