• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.459-488
• /
• 2004

General interest in the out-of-court dispute resolution system are mounting in Korea, and the spread of ADR(alternative dispute resolution) is the worldwide trend. In addition, it was confirmed that the resolution of disputes by ADR such as the decision based on arbitration made by the Prime Ministerial Administrative Decision Committee is no longer in exclusive possession of the civil case. The activation of ADR could lead to the smooth agreement between parties by getting away from the once-for-all mode of decision such as the dismissal of the application or the cancellation of disposal and the like in relation to administrative cases for the years. In consequence, it is anticipated that the administrative litigation that applicants have filed by not responding to the administrative decision would greatly reduce in the future. But, it would be urgent to provide for the legal ground of the ADR system through the revision of related laws to take root in our society because ADR has no legal binding power relating to the administrative case due to the absence of its legal grounds. The fundamental reason for having hesitated to introduce ADR in relation to the administrative case for the years is the protective interest of the third party as well as the public interest that would follow in case the agreement on the dispute resolution between parties brings the dispute to a termination in the domain of the public law. The disputes related to the contract based on the public law and the like that take on a judicial character as the administrative act have been settled within the province of ADR by applying the current laws such as the Civil Arbitration Law, Mediation Law, but their application to the administrative act of the administrative agency that takes on a character of the public law has been hesitated. But as discussed earlier, there are laws and regulations that has the obscure distinction between public and private laws. But there is no significant advantage in relation to the distinction between public and private laws. To supplement and cure these defects it is necessary to include the institutional arrangement for protection of the rights and benefits of the third party, for example the provision of the imposition of the binding power on the result of ADR between parties, in enacting its related law. It can be said that the right reorganization of the out-of-court dispute resolution system in relation to the administrative case corresponds with the ideology of public administration for cooperaton in the Administrative Law. It is high time to discuss within what realm the out-of-court dispute resolution system, alternative dispute resolution system, can be accepted and what binding power is imposed on its result, not whether it is entirely introduced into the administrative case. It is thought that the current Civil Mediation Law or Arbitration Law provides the possibility of applying arbitration or mediation only to the civil case, thereby opening the possibility of arbitration in the field of the intellectual property right law. For instance, the act of the state is not required in establishing the rights related to the secret of business or copyrights. Nevertheless, the disputes arising from or in connection with the intellectual property rights law is seen as the administrative case, and they are excluded from the object of arbitration or mediation, which is thought to be improper. This is not an argument for unconditionally importing ADR into the resolution of administrative cases. Most of the Korean people are aware that the administrative litigation system is of paramount importance as the legal relief for administrative cases. Seeing that there is an independent administrative decision system based on the Administrative Decision Law other than administrative litigation in relation to administrative cases, the first and foremost task is the necessity for the shift in thinking of people, followed by consideration of the plan for relief of the rights through the improvement of the administrative decision system. Then, it is necessary to formulate the plan for the formal introduction and activation of ADR. In this process, energetic efforts should be devoted to introducing diverse forms of ADR procedures such as settlement conference, case evaluation, mini-trial, summary jury trial, early neutral evaluation adopted in the US as the method of dispute resolution other than compromise, conciliation, arbitration and mediation

• Asian Pacific Journal of Cancer Prevention
• /
• v.15 no.3
• /
• pp.1313-1320
• /
• 2014

Introduction: Although most prostate cancers initially respond to castration with luteinizing hormonereleasing analogues or bilateral orchiectomy, progression eventually occurs. Based on the exciting results of several randomized controlled trials (RCTs), it seems that patients with metastatic castration-resistant prostate cancer (mCRPC) might benefit more from treatment withabiraterone. Therefore we conducted a systematic review to evaluate the efficacy and toxicity of abiraterone in the treatment of mCRPC. Methods: Literature was searched from Embase, PubMed, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library up to July, 2013. Quality of the study was evaluated according to the Cochrane's risk of bias of randomized controlled trial (RCT) tool, then the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) System was used to rate the level of evidence. Stata 12.0 was used for statistical analysis. Summary data from RCTs comparing abiraterone plus prednisone versus placebo plus prednisone for mCRPC were meta-analyzed. Pooled hazard ratios (HRs) for overall survival (OS), radiographic progression-free survival (RPFS) and time to PSA progression (TTPP); Pooled risk ratios (RR) for PSA response rate, objective response rate and adverse event were calculated. Results: Ten trials were included in the systematic review; Data of 2,283 patients (1,343 abiraterone; 940 placebo) from two phase 3 trials: COU-AA-301 and COU-AA-302 were meta-analyzed. Compared with placebo, abiraterone significantly prolonged OS (HR, 0.74; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 0.84), RPFS (HR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.48 to 0.74) and time to PSA progression (HR, 0.55; 95% CI, 0.43 to 0.70); it also significantly increased PSA response rate (RR, 3.63; 95% CI, 1.72 to 7.65) and objective response rate (RR, 3.05; 95% CI, 1.51 to 6.15). This meta-analysis suggested that the adverse events caused by abiraterone are acceptable and can be controlled. Conclutios: Abiraterone significantly prolonged OS, RPFS and time to progression patients with mCRPC, regardless of prior chemotherapy or whether chemotherapy-na$\ddot{i}$ve, and no unexpected toxicity was evident. Abiraterone can serve as a new standard therapy for mCRPC.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.24 no.6
• /
• pp.717-725
• /
• 2018

IMO developed VIMSAS for effective application of IMO instruments related to maritime safety and environmental protection and was implemented from 2006 to 2016. Based on this, the purpose and procedures of VIMSAS applied to IMO member states by trial, and IMSAS was enforced from January 1st 2016. IMSAS was implemented to ensure that IMO Member States, such as flag states, coastal states and port states that ratified the IMO Convention, are properly performing their given responsibilities and to ensure the effective implementation of the IMO instruments through the improvement of identified non-conformities. In this study, the auditing contents and procedures were verified based on IMO documents in order to prepare for the IMSAS audit of Republic of Korea scheduled for 2020. For this purpose, this study proposed an update of a directory, development of monitoring system for information reporting required by IMO instruments, designation of relevant experts, preparation of an English version of related national laws, training of IMSAS auditors and establishment of an IMSAS audit response team for audit of IMSAS in 2020 by referring to the results of the VIMSAS for Republic of Korea, major findings of the VIMSAS of other IMO member states, and Consolidated Audit Summary Report (CASR), which was submitted at the 5th IMO III sub-committee.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.14
• /
• pp.485-516
• /
• 2007

Jeju Special Self-Government Province adopted an autonomous police system for the first time since 60 years in Korean police. The purpose of autonomous police system is to offer a police service to be suitable in regional conditions. But Jeju autonomous police system for nearly one year after adoption is criticized to be established on the ground of political reason but not local decentralization. Actually Jeju autonomous police has not a clear cut jurisdiction and operation scope because of the jurisdiction duplication between national and autonomous police. The original task is confined on environment and sightseeing so on given to administration police for local self-government. So criminal investigation authority on general crimes is not to Jeuju autonomous police on account of special judicial police. First, it is the structural rationalization of Jeju autonomous police system. It speaks that Jeju provincial police bureau and police station have to be as national police institution, on the other hand, patrol district station and police box have to be as autonomous police institution. Of course, functional division has to be followed. National police performs managing all the assembly and demonstration by the management law on assembly and demonstration including the suppression against any large scale demonstration and disturbance, also the investigation on serious crimes just as international crimes and broaden area crimes including all the felony. Together national police performs the duty concerned to all the foreign affairs and national securities in along with the investigation on traffic accidents. On the other hand, autonomous police performs the function for citizen's life safety as crime prevention and the enforcement on the violation against police operation law, together the traffic management and the regulation on traffic violations. and the investigation on minor crime as simple violence or petty larceny including the management on local big events. Second, the budgetary of autonomous police is rationalized by the share of budgeting between Korean government and Jeju special self-government province. Third, urgent arrest authority on general crime and the rights of claims for the summary trial on minor crimes are given to autonomous police. Of course, this problem is resolved naturally in case of giving the investigation rights to autonomous police on minor crimes.