• 의료법학
• /
• 제14권1호
• /
• pp.85-116
• /
• 2013

Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency, "K-MEDI" in abbr. herein-after, is established on Apr. 9, 2012 according to the law cited in the title above for the purpose of settling medical disputes in a prompt, fair and efficient manner. Two special professional organizations are established in K-MEDI, one of them is Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Committee(hereinafter referred to as the "Mediation Committee") and the other Medical Malpractice Appraisal Board(hereinaf-ter referred to as the "Appraisal Board"), the mission of the latter is to investigate the facts concerning the disputed medical conduct and to research as to and apprai-se whether the medical conduct was negligent and whether a causal relationship exists. Each panel organized in the Mediation Committee or the Appraisal Board shall be comprised of five mediators or appraisers, including necessarily a judge or a prose-cutor respectively and any disputed case regardless of the scale, the importance or the complicacy shall be handled by a panel. As the system is not thought efficient or economic, the number of the members comprising a panel or total members com-prising the Mediation Committee or the Appraisal Board shoud be adjusted, and the process shoud be versified, including the "Rapid Process," for instance. A petition for the mediation of a medical dispute shall be rejected if the respondent fails to notify K-MEDI of his/her intention to accede to the mediation within 14days from the day on which the petition for the mediation was served(Art. 27 Cl. 7). As the option of an arbitrary decision whether the mediation proceedings shall be commenced or not given to the respondent by the clause is thought unfair, making the process unstable, and moreover, diminishing the purpose of the system established by the law cited above for solving the medical disputes, the clause shoud be amended not to allow the respondent the option of such an arbitrary deci-sion. K-MEDI shall conduct the "Program for Compensation of Medical Accidents"(Art 46) according to which unavoidable injuries caused by the medical accidents in the cour-se of childbirth and the "Advances for Damages"(Art. 47) that are the compensating moneys paid to victims in medical malpractice cases who fail to receive money at all or partly from the operator or the professional of a public health or medical institution although he/she has a final and conclusive right to be paid by them. Some operators or professionals of such institutions claim that both the programs violate their fundamental rights assured by the constitution, and that it be a justifica-tion of refusal to accede to the mediation. As any of the programs needs not to be conducted by K-MEDI, it may be a proper solution to change the conductor of the programs to avoid the unproductive controversy.

• 한국언론정보학보
• /
• 제59권
• /
• pp.211-232
• /
• 2012

스마트 미디어의 폭발적인 성장으로 최근 N스크린 서비스가 각광을 받고 있다. 그러나 N스크린 서비스가 실시간 채널을 제공하면서 콘텐츠 제작사와 서비스 제공 업체 간 저작권 문제를 초래하고 있다. 본고에서는 최근 슬링박스와 같이 N스크린을 활성화시키는 수단에 의해 야기된 공중송신권과 사적복제와 관련된 방송영상저작물의 권리관계를 살펴봄으로써 향후 예견되는 N스크린 시대의 저작권 문제를 조망하고자 한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제35권
• /
• pp.101-124
• /
• 2007

This paper purposes to examine the setting aside and the refusal of enforcement of arbitral awards and their implications for practitioners. The aim of challenging an award before a national court at the seat, or place, of arbitration is to have it modified in some way by the relevant court, or more usually, to have that court declare that the award is to be disregarded (i.e. "annulled" or "set aside") in whole or in part. If an award is set aside or annulled by the relevant court, it will usually be treated as invalid and accordingly unenforceable, not only by the courts of the seat of arbitration but also by national courts elsewhere. This is because, under both the 1958 New York Convention and the UNCITRAL Model Law, the competent court may refuse to grant recognition and enforcement of an award that has been "set aside" by a court of the seat of arbitration. The New York Convention set out various grounds for refusal of recognition and enforcement of an arbitration award. The provisions of the Model Law governing recognition, enforcement or setting-aside of awards are almost identical to those set out in the Convention. Especially, the New York Convention and the Model Law state that an arbitral award may be refused and set aside if a national court of the place of arbitration finds that the award is in conflict with the public policy of its own country. Each state has its own concept of what is required by its "public policy". It is possible to envisage, for example, a dispute over the division of gaming profits from a casino. In many states, the underlying transaction that led to the award would be regarded as a normal commercial transaction and the award would be regarded as valid. Indeed, it is a consistent theme to be found in the legislation and judical decision of many countries. If a workable definition of "international public policy" could be found, it would provide an effective way of preventing an award in an international arbitration from being set aside and refusal for purely domestic policy consideration.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제25권3호
• /
• pp.185-226
• /
• 2015

As in some developing countries and more recently some developed countries worldwide and in the Asian region, Australia has faced significant internal opposition and public debate especially over treaty-based investor-state dispute settlement (ISDS). As outlined in Part II(1), concerns have re-emerged and escalated since the first-ever claim was brought against Australia regarding its tobacco plain packaging legislation, in 2011 by Philip Morris Asia under an old BIT with Hong Kong. However, Australia signed bilateral FTAs with Korea in 2014 and with China in 2015, including ISDS protections, prompting several sets of parliamentary inquiries (Part II(2)). Australia's close trading partner, New Zealand, had already concluded an FTA with China in 2008 that included more expansive ISDS-backed investor protections. In 2015, the New Zealand Parliament has been debating ratification of its own FTA with Korea, with ISDS also now attracting growing scrutiny, as elaborated in Part III below. In both bilateral FTA negotiations, the present Korean government seems to have reverted to a strong preference for concluding investment agreements with extensive ISDS protections, despite public and parliamentary debate around 2011 in the context of ratifying its FTA with the United States. As mentioned briefly in the concluding Part IV, Korea's stance has significant implications for the future trajectory of treaty-based ISDS - and indeed international arbitration more generally - in the Asia-Pacific region, and perhaps even globally.

• Asian Journal for Public Opinion Research
• /
• 제1권1호
• /
• pp.7-25
• /
• 2013

For the Palestinians, what is the impact of the Arab Spring? The revolution not only dislodged Mubarak from the presidency, but also changed Egyptian policy regarding Palestinians in Gaza. New Egyptian diplomacy has encouraged Hamas and Fatah, which had been in dispute, to seek reconciliation and has loosened the border control on humanitarian grounds. We focus on Palestinian voting attitudes in the wake of the Arab Spring. Despite the vast quantity of literature written about Palestinian politics since the first decade of the millennium, we know little about the determinants of Palestinian attitudes toward the divided governments in the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. The Fatah government, in the West Bank, increased in popularity after submitting a request for UN recognition of Palestinian statehood. In Gaza, the Hamas government lost popularity because of mismanagement but won support through the success of its prisoner swap deal with Israel. However, evaluation of the ruling party does not depend only on one-time events. This research attempts to measure the impact of policy change in Gaza after the Arab Spring. We provide an account of our research on Palestinian attitudes toward the divided governments based on two sets of the original survey data conducted in May 2009 and June 2012. The paper sheds light on Palestinian attitudes and makes clear the effects of "democratization" in the Middle East and the effects of regional context factors on the occupied Palestinians.

• 디지털융복합연구
• /
• 제10권4호
• /
• pp.243-250
• /
• 2012

본 논문에서는 환자의 개인정보를 병원서버에 저장하지 않고 국민건강보험공단 서버에 저장함으로써 개인정보를 보다 안전하게 저장하고, 병원과 환자간의 의료분쟁을 좀 더 원활하게 해결하기 위한 프로토콜을 제안한다. 제안한 전자의무기록에 대한 프로토콜 설계는 RSA의 공개키 알고리즘을 이용한 방식과 DSA의 전자서명을 이용한 방식을 이용하여 설계한다. 또한 통합인증기관을 이용하여 보다 안전하고 신뢰하는 전자의무기록을 구축한다. 제안한 의료정보시스템은 의료인과 환자간의 신뢰관계 확보 및 의료분쟁 시 증거 자료를 제공하고 더 나아가 의료사고를 좀더 줄이고 다양한 응용분야에서 효율적으로 사용될 것이다.

• 한국건설관리학회:학술대회논문집
• /
• 한국건설관리학회 2007년도 정기학술발표대회 논문집
• /
• pp.239-242
• /
• 2007

현재 국내건설공사 참여자들은 계약문서의 계약조건에 의해 공사를 수행하기보다는 건설현장에 뿌리내려온 전통적인 관행에 의해 공사를 수행해왔다. 복잡 다양한 건설환경을 고려하여 볼 때, 단지 몇 권의 계약문서만으로 그 모든 분쟁 요소를 해결할 수 없다. 따라서 본 연구는 현 국내의 건설공사의 계약문서인 공사계약일반조건을 고찰하여 불합리를 해결함과 동시에 일반조건의 개선방안 및 계약관리의 효율화 방안을 제시하여 계약관리 및 공사관리의 미숙으로 인한 클레임을 최소화하기위한 방안을 모색하고자 한다. 본 연구결과 국내의 공공건설 클레임과 관련된 문제를 최소화하기 위한 방안을 다음과 같이 제시하였다. (1) 설계변경시기에 대한 명확한 규정이 필요하다. (2) 감리자의 권한을 점차 강화하고, 동시에 책임도 강화해야 한다. (3) 설계감리제도가 계약에 반영되어야 한다. (4) 클레임제기시 그 사유를 분명히 하도록 한다.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제77권
• /
• pp.69-89
• /
• 2018

The United States of America is one of the most favoring countries in which mandatory pre-arbitration clauses in the form of adhesion contract have been widely recognized and supported by courts and the Federal Arbitration Act. However, after the financial crisis in 2008 and the National Arbitration Forum scandal in 2009, in enacting the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act ('Dodd-Frank Act'), Section 1028(a) of the Act requires the newly created Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) to provide Congress with a report on "the use of agreements providing for arbitration of any future dispute between covered persons and consumers". Section 1028(b) also grants the CFPB the authority to "prohibit or impose conditions or limitations on the use of an agreement between a covered person and a consumer for a consumer financial product or service providing for arbitration of any future dispute between the parties, if the Bureau finds that such a prohibition or imposition of conditions or limitations is in the public interest and for the protection of consumers." Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB issued a report entitled "2015 Arbitration Study: Report to Congress 2015 (Report)" in March 2015. This paper examines some major legal issues of the Report and makes a few recommendations for Korean financial institutions which entered into the U.S. financial market or has a plan to do so in the near future.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제19권3호
• /
• pp.161-178
• /
• 2009

This article focuses on the enforceability of arbitration agreements m the dispute of standby letter of credit, especially with the case analysis of the leading case from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. In Nova Hut a.s. v. Kaiser Group International Inc. case, while the underlying contract contained an arbitration clause, a guarantee to assure contractor's performance did not contain an arbitration clause. Nova Hut drew on the standby for the Contractor's failure to deliver contractual obligations. Against the Kaiser's action under US Bankruptcy law, Nova Hut moved to stay the proceedings pending arbitration, to compel arbitration, and to dismiss the complaint. The US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware denied Nova Hut's motions. On appeal, Kaiser argued that it was not subject to arbitration since it was not a party to the contract. It also argued that Nova Hut had waived its right to arbitration by filing a proof of claim in the bankruptcy proceeding and commencing legal actions in other countries. The appeals court noted that in order to avoid arbitration on those grounds prejudice must be shown. It indicated that because there was no long delay in requesting arbitration and no discovery conducted m the course of litigation, the Kaiser could not demonstrate actual prejudice on the part of Owner. In light of public policy favoring arbitration, the nature of the claims in the parties' agreements, Kaiser's conduct in embracing the agreements, and their expectation of benefit, the appeals court ruled that the doctrine of equitable estoppel applied in requiring the Parent to arbitrate.

• 통상정보연구
• /
• 제14권2호
• /
• pp.369-387
• /
• 2012

한미 FTA의 협상 과정에서부터 비준을 걸쳐 발효된 이후까지 끊이지 않는 논쟁의 중심에는 바로 투자자-국가 소송제도인 ISD가 있다. ISD의 본 취지인 외국인 투자자에 대한 보호기능은 국제통상환경에서 없어서는 안 될 보호장치이며 지금까지 수많은 양자투자협정(BIT)에도 적용되어온 제도임에도 ISD에 대한 부정적인 시각은 여전히 존재한다. 그중에서도 가장 큰 우려는 정부의 공공정책이 ISD 때문에 제한될 수 있다는 것이다. 실제로 한미 FTA의 당사국인 미국이 맺은 NAFTA의 경우를 보면 ISD로 인하여 캐나다와 멕시코 정부가 ISD 제소를 당해왔으며, 그로 인하여 공공정책을 추진하면서 제약을 느껴온 것은 사실이다. 그러나 일부의 ISD 사건에서는 일국 정부의 공공정책이 투자자의 이익을 우선한다는 판정부의 결정도 있었다. 그렇다면 한미 FTA가 막 발효된 이 시점에서 우리가 앞으로 일어날 수 있는 우리 정부에 대한 미국기업이나 미국인 투자자의 ISD 제소에 어떻게 대비해야 하며, 정부의 공공정책이 어떻게 해야 ISD 제소의 표적이 되지 아니할지에 대한 분석이 필요하다. 이러한 분석에 가장 효과적인 자료가 미국이 당사국으로 있는 NAFTA의 ISD 사건들이다. NAFTA의 ISD 사건 분석은 판정부가 판정을 함에 있어 어떠한 법리적 해석을 하는지를 알 수 있는 근거자료이며 나아가 우리의 상황에 적용하여 대비하는데 필수적인 도구이기도 하다.