• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제20권2호
• /
• pp.27-47
• /
• 2010

It is well recognized that the availability of prompt, effective and economical means of dispute resolution is an important element in the orderly growth and encouragement of international trade and investment. Increasingly, arbitration, instead of litigation in national courts, has become the preferred means of resolving private international commercial disputes. Under the situation, it will be important thing for arbitral institutions to reach an agreement to promote the dispute settlement of the commercial disputes, for which efforts have been made between the Korean Commercial Arbitral Board(KCAB) and principal arbitration institutions of the foreign countries. Since 1973, the KCAB has entered into many arbitration agreements with well-known foreign institutions of arbitration. If the place of arbitration is not so designated by the parties, it, as a general rule, shall be the country of the respondent(s) under the Korea-Japanese Arbitration Agreement. On the other hand, the U.S.-Korean Commercial Arbitration Agreement maintains 'Joint Arbitration Committee which finally decide the place of arbitration. In 1996, the Korea-Austria Agreement of Cooperation was concluded for the prompt and equitable settlement on an amicable basis of commercial disputes. Under this Agreement, arbitral institutions between Korea and Austria agreed to act as an appointing authority in accordance with the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. It is also very important for Korea and China including North Korea to cooperate each other for the settlement of the commercial disputes within the Pan Yellow Sea Economic Bloc(PYSEB). The PYSEB is quickly becoming a distinctive and crucial region in the world sharing geographical proximity, many common historical experiences, and similar cultural norms and values although they have disparities in stages of development, trade and economic policies, and financial and legal frameworks. Finally, it should be considered to establish a central common system for settlement promotion of the commercial disputes within the PYSEB through the arbitration agreement. Such a dispute resolution system was already introduced and established within the area of the NAFTA, and it is called the Commercial Arbitration and Mediation Center for the Americas(CAMCA).

• 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.

• 한국경제지리학회지
• /
• 제19권3호
• /
• pp.491-511
• /
• 2016

본 논문은 세계 자동차산업을 대상으로 2015년판 OECD-TIVA 자료 분석을 통해 구축된 수출품의 해외조달 부가가치 네트워크 특성을 사회네트워크 기법을 활용하여 분석하였다. 그 연구결과를 요약하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 1995-2011년 기간 동안에 생산공정 분업은 EU, NAFTA와 같은 역내 경제블록에 한정된 것이 아니라 세계적인 차원으로 심화되었다. 둘째, 수출품의 부가가치 해외조달 네트워크는 위계적이고 공간적으로 집중되고 평균거리가 짧아지는 좁은 세상 네트워크의 특성들을 보여주었다. 셋째, 자동차산업 글로벌 가치사슬에서 주요 공급자는 소수의 국가들에 불과하지만 중간재의 사용자는 다수의 국가들이다. 가장 핵심적인 해외 부가가치의 공급자들인 미국, 독일, 중국 간에 특징적인 차이가 존재한다. 생산공정 분업이 글로벌 수준에서 전개된 것은 사실이지만 그 이면에 중심과 주변, 국내와 외국자본의 이분법의 긴장이 놓여 있다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제9권1호
• /
• pp.139-160
• /
• 1999

International commercial arbitrations have developed into a simple form in which both parties involved in the dispute by a contract intend to solve the dispute through the legal arbitration system. however nowadays the above traditional form taken by international projects are rarely seen and instead the form of complex arbitration in which many parties are involved has become more and more universal. The complex arbitration means not only many-sided parties concerned but also means a plural number of contract involved in conflicts, a plural number of issues involved in conflicts and a plural number of contracts though their contractors are not in a plural number. However in this report the complex arbitrations will be studied into categories as follows : 1. Pure multi-issue situations, 2. Pure multi-party situations, 3. Pure multi-contract situations. A Pure Multi-Issue arbitration basically includes a plural number of claims between the two parties concerned. A Pure Multi-party case classically presupposes an arbitration clause which involves a plural number of parties concerned. After Party A takes a legal proceeding and then Party B institutes a request to Party C in the above proceeding. In that case the problem arises on whether it is allowed to do so or not. A Pure Multi-Contract case presupposes that when Party A and Party B have independent arbitration clauses based on separate contract relations, respectively, the problem is whether both above-mentioned proceedings can be unified into one or not. As for the above-mentioned complex arbitration, though international treaties are being formed, including the WTO treaties, the NAFTA treaties, the Mercosur treaties and others, legal regulations and customs have not yet been formed domestically. The institutional preparations will be necessitated in consideration of national legal status as well as international treaty relations.

• 한국관광식음료학회지:관광식음료경영연구
• /
• 제17권1호
• /
• pp.41-67
• /
• 2006

The study is aimed to analyze the influence of FTA(Free Trade Agreement) between Korea and Japan on tourism and to suggest ways to increase tourists exchange between them by considering countermeasures of Korea's tourism based on the analysis and deriving political significance. The results of the study showed that the expected effects of FTA between Korea and Japan on tourism would overall be positive. There would be increases in employment and a higher rate of foreign-exchange earning, which plays a critical role in the cash flow. Therefore the government is required to prepare for several political measures as follows. First, ways to promote investment in tourism have to be established in a systematic way for FTA. Second, restructuring of tourism has to be considered seriously for tourism to be a high value-added industry after FTA. Third, the tourism information industry needs to be included in the tourism promotion act to promote e-tourism using information technology. In addition to this, an expansive cluster strategy needs to be developed, which relates tourism to other industries like culture and movies and to find ways to re-locate and re-educate manpower currently engaged in the tourism industry. Though the study investigated the influence of FTA on tourism through a practical analysis, it was restricted only to Korea. So the influence of FTA between Korea and Japan on the tourism of Japan should be included in further study. Furthermore, in subsequent studies the CGE(Computable General Equilibrium) model will be applied for objective analysis of the effects. Or measuring the ripple effect with multinational inter-industry relation table will be made for the study to make practical contributions to the development of government policy.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제17권2호
• /
• pp.141-165
• /
• 2007

This study aims to make a contribution to the promotion of trade and economic development of South Korea, and, at the same time, call attention to the increasing trend of investment agreements concluded within Free Trade Agreements (FTA) by examining theoretically FTAs and dispute resolution and investigating systematically the conclusion procedure of agreements, and the system, institutions, and jurisdiction of dispute resolution, and presenting these findings to the government and investors involved. The most problematic aspect in the legal process of arbitration involving disputes over investment is that of arguments concerning the right of jurisdiction. When a dispute arises, even though an investor files for arbitration at an ICSID institution, the parties become involved in another energy-consuming argument even before proceeding to the hearing and decision of the original plan in cases in which the respondent of the dispute files an objection to the decision rights of the arbitral tribunal. As the main basis for this type of plea, the point of non-existence of jurisdiction is first raised where the applicable dispute does not fall under the range of investments defined in individual investment contracts or investment agreements such as a Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT). To avoid an open-ended definition of investment for the range of investments, articles concerning investments in the FTA and NAFTA between Canada and the USA adopt the limited closed-list method. Article 96 of the FTA between Japan and Mexico applied the same abovementioned method of limited form of definition regarding range of investments and concluded BITs between member countries of APEC applied a similar method as well. Instead of employing the previously used inclusive definition, the BITs concluded between countries of Latin America and the USA are equipped with limited characteristics of an investment. Furthermore, to correspond with this necessary condition the three following requirements are needed : 1) fixed investment funding; 2) expected profits resulting from such investments; 3) and the existence of fixed risk bearing.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제19권2호
• /
• pp.27-47
• /
• 2009

Concepts of mediation and conciliation as alternative dispute resolutions are often confusingly used. As to what is meant by mediation and conciliation, there is no uniform legal definition. However, there has been a distinction between two methods of dispute settlement under the international law (UN Charter, WTO DSU, NAFTA, EU mediation directive, WIPO Mediation Rules) although there is no clear definition on the terms of mediation and conciliation. And also under the domestic law such as U.K, France, Germany, a clear distinction has been made between two terms. Mediation means a facilitated negotiation between two parties through the intervention of a third party. A third and neutral party (mediator) help the parties in dispute to find their solution by managing a certain mediation protocol and facilitating communication between the parties while in conciliation, a third party evaluative the case and can suggest the parties a legally non-binding solution. Once the parties accept it, it becomes binding between them. However, in the U.S,, it seems that there is no practical use of distinguishing mediation and conciliation. The term of mediation is more commonly used than the term of conciliation and it has two kinds of mediation such as facilitative and evaluative mediation. Korea's conciliation system is close to conciliation or evaluative mediation. In conclusion, what is distinct between mediation and conciliation is the role of third party. If a neutral third party takes a role of advisor or facilitator, then he or she may employ a proper protocol to help the parties to find themselves their solution (mediation) while if a neutral person plays a role of evaluator, then he or she listens to the parties and suggest a solution to them (conciliation).

• 한국항만경제학회지
• /
• 제22권3호
• /
• pp.79-96
• /
• 2006

본 연구에는 국제무역이론에서 자주 이용되고 있는 중력모형을 이용하여 시계열 분석에서 고려되지 못한 항만입지(주간선항로상의 위치여부), 항만비용(해상운송비용), 지역경제협력(ASEAN, EU, NAFTA) 등을 시계열 자료와 결합하여 부산항의 해상물동량을 추정하였다. 부산항의 수출입물동량에 대한 분석 결과를 살펴보면, 두 나라간의 거리에 (-) 영향을 받고, 우리나라와 교역상대국 GDP의 합에 대해서는 (+) 효과를 나타내는 것으로 분석되었다. 교역상대국이 주 간선항로 위치 여부(LINE)와 해운협정 체결(ARG) 여부는 (+) 부호를 나타내며 통계적으로 유의한 결과를 얻었다. 해상운송비용의 경우는 해상운임이 1% 포인트 상승하면 부산항의 수출입물동량은 0.323에서 0.490% 정도 감소하는 것으로 분석되었다. 부산항의 입출항 환적물동량에 대한 분석 결과, 우리나라와 교역상대국 GDP의 합은 (+)의 호과를 나타내는 것으로 분석되었으며 주간선항로의 위치변수(LINE)는 (+)의 부호를 나타내고 통계적으로도 유의한 것으로 나타났다. 해상운송비용은 1% 포인트 상승하면 부산항의 환적 물동량이 약 0.586에서 0.895 가량 감소하는 것으로 분석되었다. 지역경제협력체인 EU에 대해서는 수출입과 환적물동량 모두에서 (-)의 부호를 나타내었고 ASEAN은 환적물동량에서 (+)의 부호를 나타내며 통계적으로 유의한 결과를 얻었다.

• 국제지역연구
• /
• 제18권3호
• /
• pp.205-229
• /
• 2014

글로벌 생산 네트워크는 다국적기업들이 전략적으로 자사의 가치사슬을 단계별로 분리하여 다양한 지역으로 이전시키면서 나타나기 시작하였다. 글로벌 생산 네트워크는 자재, 부품, 소재, 그리고 완제품의 빈번한 운송을 수반하고, 신속하고 효율적인 운용을 요구하기 때문에 역외보다는 통합된 지역 내에서 더욱 발달하였다. 여러 해의 자료를 심층 분석한 결과, 해당 지역 내에서 고부가가치 상품의 생산에 비교우위를 지닌 선진국들은 ICT 부품과 소재의 생산에 특화하며 높은 수출 현시비교우위지수를 보였다. 반면에 노동집약적인 조립 공정에 비교우위를 가진 개도국들은 높은 수입 현시비교우위지수를 보여주었다. 일부 개도국들은 글로벌 생산 네트워크 참여를 통해 꾸준히 기술역량을 제고하면서 산업구조 고도화 발전을 이룰 수 있었음 또한 자료 분석 결과 알 수 있었다. 동아시아 국가들은 다양한 요인들로 인해 EU나 NAFTA 지역 국가들에 비해 글로벌 생산 네트워크에 많이 참여하였는데, 해당 국가들의 ICT 분야 기술발전 속도 및 수출의 빠른 증가세가 보여주듯이 동아시아 국가들은 글로벌 생산 네트워크 참여로 크게 수혜하였다. 그러나 이는 결과적으로 ICT 부품과 소재 산업에 있어서 글로벌 생산 네트워크의 지역별 구축 정도에 상당한 불균형을 야기하였음을 확인할 수 있었다.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제17권1호
• /
• pp.3-32
• /
• 2007

This age is called the age of global trade, and the World Trade Organization is a forerunner in promoting the global free trade through multilateral negotiations as the global level. On the other hand, regional economic cooperation such as North American Free Trade Agreement(NAFTA) is appearing, saying that promotion by WTO takes too much time. As is known to everybody, Europe is on the way of integrating member states through EU not to mention economic cooperation. Even in Asia such tendency is shown through ASEAN, Korea, China and Japan in Northeast Asia share geographical proximity, many common historical experiences, and similar cultural norms and values although they have disparities in stages of development, trade and economic policies, and financial and legal frameworks. Under the situation, efforts have been made between three countries of Korea, China and Japan for the conclusion of investment agreements including FTA. If the conclusion of the FTA between the three countries would be realized, it would promote regional trade and investment, contributing to economic growth in the Northeast Asian region. The writer in this paper reviewed the settlement of private commercial dispute including investment dispute arising from the FTA and investment agreements. The investment dispute is quite different from an ordinary commercial dispute arising from commercial transactions in view of disputing parties, applicable laws and rules, etc. Therefore it is a problem of vital importance that the parties interested in investment under the FTA as well as the relevant investment agreement should understand and cope with the settlement mechanism of investment disputes arising therefrom. The ICSID Convention provides facilities for the conciliation and arbitration of disputes between member countries and investors who qualify as nationals of other member countries. All contracting states of the ICSID Convention are required by the Convention to recognize and enforce the ICSID arbitral awards. The New York Convention(formally called "United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards") is also applicable for the enforcement of arbitral awards to be rendered under the FTA. As to applicable rules, the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules may be required for the settlement of investment disputes under the FTA. This Rules has adopted by the internationally recognized arbitral organizations although it was developed primarily for use in ad hoc arbitration. The promotion of arbitral cooperation may be realized through agreements between arbitral institutions. Especially under the NAPTA system, a central common system was established to resolve jointly private commercial disputes arising from such free trades by the initiative of arbitral organizations among the member countries. It is called Commercial Arbitration and Mediation Center for the Americas(CAMCA), which may be a good example for the settlement promotion of the private commercial disputes between Korea and other relevant countries.