• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.4
• /
• pp.77-96
• /
• 2013

International Arbitration has distinguished itself as a method for dispute resolution that pleases both common and civil law practitioners. It, however, is not free of criticism, especially when fact-finding and evidentiary issues are at play. Perhaps because fact-finding is very closely linked to the culture in which they lie, perhaps because of the lack of a clear evidentiary rules governing international arbitration, a theory of evidence in international arbitration is still far fetched. Through the analysis of the distinctions between dispute resolution systems and the search for truth paradigm, this paper aims to develop and present an outline for the development of a theory of evidence in international arbitration.

• Journal of KIISE:Software and Applications
• /
• v.34 no.9
• /
• pp.880-888
• /
• 2007

Referential expression 'Geot' is often occurred in Korean dialogues. However, it has not been properly dealt with by the previous researchers of reference resolution, since it is not by itself the referential expression like pronoun and definite noun phrases, and it has never been discriminated from non-referring 'geot'. To resolve this problem, we establish a feature set which is based on the linguistic property of 'geot' and the discourse property of its text, and propose a method to identify referential 'geot' from non-referring 'geot' using decision tree. In the experiment, our system achieved the F-measures of 92.3% for non-referring geot and of 82.2% for referential geot and the total classification performance of 89.27%, and outperformed the classification system based on pattern rules.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.15 no.1
• /
• pp.67-93
• /
• 2005

To realize the spirit of South-North Joint Declaration of June 15, 2000, the authorities concerned of South and North Korea have reached agreements to settle commercial disputes as well as to set up a South-North arbitration rule which is becoming a problem of vital importance between South and North Korea. The purpose of this paper is to analyzed and review carefully the drafting of Commercial Arbitration Rule of the commercial Arbitration Committee of the South-North Korea so The South-North Korea Commercial Rule is an institutional organization for resolution of commercial disputes arising form trade and investment between south and north Korea. Under the situation, it is becoming a problem of vital importance how to manage and control the Arbitration Rule for prompt and effective resolution of South-North Korea of commercial disputes It is probable that the drafting of Commercial Arbitration Rule of the Commercial Arbitration Committee in South Korea should be written by the Commercial Arbitration Committee of South Korean arbitral body after these organizations are established and appointed. it's not recommendable that we the South-North Korea write the only enc South Korean draft of the Commercial Arbitration Committee of the South-Nonh Korea. The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) should be designated as the arbitration institution of South Korea because the KCAB is the only authorized institution in South Korea, statutorily empowered to settle any kind of commercial disputes at home and abroad.

• Korean Journal of Remote Sensing
• /
• v.31 no.4
• /
• pp.303-319
• /
• 2015

The objectives of this paper are to measure surface imperviousness using three different classification methods: per-pixel, sub-pixel, and object-oriented classification. They are tested on high-spatial resolution QuickBird data at 2.4 meters (four spectral bands and three principal component bands) as well as a medium-spatial resolution Landsat TM image at 30 meters. To measure impervious surfaces, we selected 30 sample sites with different land uses and residential densities across image representing the city of Phoenix, Arizona, USA. For per-pixel an unsupervised classification is first conducted to provide prior knowledge on the possible candidate spectral classes, and then a supervised classification is performed using the maximum-likelihood rule. For sub-pixel classification, a Linear Spectral Mixture Analysis (LSMA) is used to disentangle land cover information from mixed pixels. For object-oriented classification several different sets of scale parameters and expert decision rules are implemented, including a nearest neighbor classifier. The results from these three methods show that the object-oriented approach (accuracy of 91%) provides more accurate results than those achieved by per-pixel algorithm (accuracy of 67% and 83% using Landsat TM and QuickBird, respectively). It is also clear that sub-pixel algorithm gives more accurate results (accuracy of 87%) in case of intensive and dense urban areas using medium-resolution imagery.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.165-190
• /
• 2013

As intellectual property rights are perceived as the key element of creating added values and securing competitiveness, the result of intellectual property rights disputes play an important role in the success of companies. As seen from above strong points of an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) system in Chapter III, intellectual property rights disputes increasingly tend to be resolved by ADR rather than litigation. Discussions about and operation of ADR are already being actively carried out in many countries, and major ADR institutions have been acquiring experience in a variety of intellectual property rights disputes. To enhance the use and recognition of ADR as the way of resolving the Intellectual Property Rights disputes in Korea, this study suggested the following three ways. First, domestic ADR institutions, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board (KCAB) will need to establish cooperative systems with prominent overseas institutions to lead the disputing parties to fair resolutions as well as to instill trust in international arbitration institutions. Second, they will need to contribute to the promotion of arbitration systems throughout society by developing and applying a variety of arbitration systems as well as securing a pool of professionals. Finally, the arbitration rules will need to be continuously improved to deal with disputes promptly and reinforce privacy protection.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.47-64
• /
• 2011

The China International Economic and Trade Arbitration Commission(CIETAC) released online arbitration rules which apply the resolution of disputes over electronic commerce transactions, as well as other economic and trade disputes in which the parties agree to do. The evidence submitted by the parties may be electronic evidence created, sent, received or stored by electronic, optical or magnetic means. Electronic evidence with a reliable electronic signature shall carry the same effect and probative force as a document with a hand-written signature. Where a case is tried in a tribunal, the arbitration tribunal shall conduct an online trial hearing using internet video conference or other electronic or computer communication means. Unless the parties have another agreement, summary procedure shall apply to cases where the amount in dispute exceeds RMB 100,000 but no more than RMB 1 million, or where the amount in dispute exceeds RMB 1 million and a party submits a written application for summary procedure after obtaining the written consent of the other party. Unless the parties have agreed otherwise, fast-track procedure shall apply to cases where the amount in dispute does not exceed RMB 100,000 or where the amount in dispute exceeds RMB 100,000 and a party submits a written application for fast-track procedure after obtaining the written consent of the other party. Notable features of the Online Rules are as follows; first, there is not detailed consideration for online arbitration. Second, communications between the parties and the tribunal are allowed only through the Secretariat. Third, elaborate provisions regarding the electronic submission and transmission of documents is provided for. Forth, various factors must be considered by the tribunal in deciding the evidence's reliability. Fifth, reasonable endeavours is levied on CIETAC to keep data communications secure and encrypted. Sixth, the tribunal has the right to investigate and collect relevant evidence. And finally different procedures are provided for in consideration of the various types of E-commerce.

• Proceedings of the Korea Inteligent Information System Society Conference
• /
• 2001.01a
• /
• pp.378-382
• /
• 2001

The purpose of this study was to develop an expert system supporting the diagnosis of diffuse interstitial lung disease by high resolution computed tomography. CLIPS(C language integrated production system) with rule-based reasoning was used to develop the system. Development of expert system had three stages knowledge acquisition, knowledge representation, and reasoning. Knowledge was obtained and integrated, from tables and figure legends of a representative textbook in the domain of this expert system, High-Resolution CT of the Lung, by Webb WR, Mueller NL, and Naidich DP. The acquired knowledge was analyzed to form a knowledge base. Overlapping knowledge was eliminated, similar pieces of knowledge were combined and professional terms were defined. The most important knowledge of findings was then selected for each disease. After groupings of combined findings were made, disease groups were analyzed sequentially to determine final diagnoses. The system was based upon the input of 69 diseases, 185 findings, 73 conditions, 387 status, and 62 rules. The system was set up to determine the diagnoses of diseases from the combination of findings using forward reasoning. In an empirical trial, the system was applied to support the diagnosis of 40 cases of diffuse interstitial lung diseases. The performance of two doctors with support of the system was compared to that of another two doctors without support of the system. The two doctors with the support of the system made more accurate diagnoses than the doctors without the support of the system. The system is believed to be useful for the diagnosis of rare diseases and for cases with many possible differential diagnoses. In conclusion, an expert system supporting the high resolution computed tomographic diagnosis of diffuse interstitial lung disease was developed and the system is thought to be useful for medical practice.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.3-27
• /
• 2016

There is a need for disputes in sports to be settled by arbitration rather than a court ruling, taking the unique characteristics of sports into consideration. Arbitration is a form of alternative dispute resolution (ADR). A dispute resolution system is regarded as: an arbitrator is selected by the agreement between the parties, and a binding decision is made, which the parties obey, consequently resulting in a final resolution. To resolve a dispute upon arbitration, there must be an arbitration agreement upon the free will of the parties. In relation to the arbitration agreement, however, there are some cases in which sports organizations have an arbitration clause in the articles of association, regulations or player registration application that call for settling disputes by arbitration. In such cases, the validity of the arbitration agreement may create doubt whether or not this sort of arbitration has been made by mutual agreement. Consequently this is required to be legally examined. The activities of a sports organization are recognized as part of private autonomy, and they include even the rights that establish regulations or rules. Nonetheless, the powers that such sport organizations are able to establish are not allowed without limit. However, sports activities and autonomy shall be protected as themselves. Therefore, if we give priority to arbitration upon the independent arbitrator and fair process by establishing an independent arbitral organization in charge of sports disputes to handle the effective resolution of disputes and protect sports autonomy and ask for a court decision if one party disobeys the arbitration, or the sports arbitration prepositive principle, it seems helpful to resolve the unfairness of compulsory jurisdiction and the clause for sports arbitration and protect the player's right of choice and of claims for trial.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.107-131
• /
• 2013

Online-ADR (Alternative Dispute Resolution) has been receiving attention from the international community as a means of alternative dispute resolution for consumer disputes in both small and mass international e-commerce. The EU Parliament and the Council proposed the Online Dispute Resolution Regulation for Consumer Disputes (hereafter, "EU Consumer ODR Regulation") and the Directive on Alternative Dispute Resolution of Consumer Disputes (hereafter, "EU Consumer ADR Directive") as a legislative package, now scheduled to be adopted. Those efforts strengthen consumer protection by enhancing ODR in international e-commerce and improving of the functions of the e-commerce market. The EU Consumer ADR and ODR regulation package will operate in conjunction with the ODR platform as a single point across Europe, abandoning the ADR system of each member. Consumers and traders who need dispute resolution apply on the EU ODR platform linked website, and the applications are distributed to individual ADR institutions in accordance with the Rules and Procedure of ADR institutions in the respective country. Although there has been partial progress in Korea for ODR programs such as the establishment of the Online Administrative Trial and the procedures of individual ADR agencies operating through the website, existing norms do not fully support the system. At this point, we see many implications of the EU Consumer ADR and ODR regulation package on the direction chosen for domestic ADR and ODR policy and legislation. This study introduces the main features and content of the EU Consumer ADR Directive (draft) and ODR Regulation provisions, and describes the direction of domestic policy and legislation regarding Online-ADR.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.28 no.1
• /
• pp.43-75
• /
• 2018

The Court of Arbitration for Sport (CAS) was created to focus on the procedural complexity in the resolution of sports-related disputes, confidentiality, the matter of expenses, and the necessity of prompt settlement in the field of international sports. The CAS had originally launched as one of bodies of International Olympic Committee (IOC), but later it became properly operational as an independent organization to facilitate sports-related disputes when the International Council of Arbitration for Sport (ICAS), which came into force in accordance with the Paris Agreement in 1984 and has acted in place of IOC, took responsibility for the administration and financing of the CAS. The CAS is composed of four divisions, the Ordinary Arbitration Division and the Appeals Arbitration Division, the Ad hoc Division created later in 1996 and the CAS Anti-Doping Division (CAS ADD) established as from 2016 only to conduct proceedings and to issue decisions on an alleged anti-doping rule violation, and two (Sydney and New York) permanent decentralized offices. The head office of the CAS is Lausanne, Switzerland. Since CAS ADD was established, CAS Ad hoc Division has had jurisdiction over the appeal case against a decision pronounced by the IOC, an NOC, an international Federation or an Organizing Committee for the Olympic Games. Although there are so many virtues of CAS as a resolution authority for sports-related disputes in terms of its organization, arbitration rules and procedures, it is also true that the CAS has not been showing the consistency. The CAS should overcome these issues through much more advanced system and its instant and fair decisions.