• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.20 no.2
• /
• pp.59-158
• /
• 2005

When a military aircraft suffers damages due to the defects in its design, manufacturing or notification, all of which are generally understood as products liability defects, the obvious compensation is sought as it would in other consumer good case. However, there exist clear yet unappreciated difference between general consumer goods and military aircraft, as far as products liability law is concerned - some sort of recovery should be obtained even when there exist only defects, not damages, to the aircraft because of the implication of defective parts is much grave than what can be expected in a consumer goods case. While certain anticipatory measures do exist in manual or at negotiation stages for the safety of military aircraft, such measures are ineffective, if not ambiguous, in recovery effort in the post-accident stage In another word, the standardized military procurement contract manuals and boilerplate forms do not appreciate the unique and dangerous military nature of military aircraft. There are many unique legal issues which can arise when trying to prevent defective aircraft or parts, or to recover compensations for accident due to such defects. At two-level, the government should establish legal system (or countermeasures if you'd like) for purchasing safer military aircraft. First, one should be able to work with legal ground and policy that allows selecting and purchasing safer goods - the purpose of such contract is not litigious, but rather in acquiring what are most reliable. Second, in case the defects do arise and lead to damages, solid legal principles and instructions should be established for effectively pursuing appropriate company, (usually a aerospace industry giant with much experience) for products liability - the purpose of such pursuit is inevitable for a public official, since he or she is no private business man with much flexibilities, even to the point of waiving such compensatory right for future business purposes. This article tries to identify problems in methods of procuring military aircraft or parts - after reviewing on how the military can improve on legal and policy grounds for procuring what will be the focus of future military strength, it will offer some of the ways to effectively handling and resolving a liability issues.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.53 no.4
• /
• pp.136-149
• /
• 2020

It is generally believed that Douglas Fir timber imported from North America is used in repair work for Korean wooden heritage sites due to an insufficient supply of extra-large sized Korean pine timber. Based on this understanding in the cultural heritage repair field, Cultural Heritage Repair Business Entities ("CHRBE") prefer North American Douglas Fir timber which is more easily acquired on the market than large Korean pine timber. However, if CHRBE use large quantities of foreign-origin wood in the heritage repair field, this presents the threat of negative domestic impacts on cultural heritage such as breaching the preservation principal and ultimately weakening material authenticity. Therefore, this study aims to investigate the current supply status of large Korean pine timber through examination of existing research, interviews with experts engaged in CHRBE, and timber mills. With this information, the authors seek to identify whether the market supply of large Korean pine timber is indeed insufficient or not. In addition to this, this paper identifies the reasons why large Korean pine timber is not widely used if such timber supply is actually sufficient. In order to propose suggestions regarding the issues above, the authors study the distribution channel for large Korean pine timber and the price spectrum of this timber through examination of price information from the public agencies under the Korea Forest Service, research papers from the Cultural Heritage Administration, and estimation documents from timber mills. This paper also identifies two main opinions about why Korean timber has not been commonly used in the Korean heritage repair field. The first opinion is that the supply of large Korean pine timber really is insufficient in Korea. However, the second opinion is that it is hardly used due to inappropriateness of the government's procurement and estimation system, despite the fact that the supply of the timbers on the market is actually sufficient. Through the aforementioned research, this paper comes to the conclusion that the second opinion has strong grounds in many aspects. In terms of suggestions, alternative routes are proposed to stimulate the use of large Korean pine timber via supply by the 'Korea Foundation for Traditional Architecture and Technology' and surveys of the price spectrum of the timber, etc.