• 대한토목학회논문집
• /
• 제31권2D호
• /
• pp.247-253
• /
• 2011

우리 해외건설은 2009년 491억불의 수주 실적을 기록하며 500억불 시대를 눈앞에 둔 국가수출 주력산업으로서의 위상을 정립하였다. 하지만 해외건설시장에서 안정적인 수주 실적을 확보하기 위한 타국 업체와의 경쟁은 어느 때보다 치열해 지고 있으며 이와 더불어 우리 업체 간의 경쟁도 기술력과 가격 경쟁력의 향상으로 인해 매우 치열한 실정이다. 이러한 업체 간 경쟁은 무리한 저가입찰로도 이어져 수익성이 확보되지 않은 프로젝트를 수주하는 등의 결과를 낳기도 한다. 때문에 각 업체에게는 해외건설시장에서 우위를 점하고 기대수익률을 확보할 수 있는 프로젝트를 수주하기 위한 다양한 전략의 개발은 매우 중요한 과제이다. 이러한 중요성을 바탕으로 본 연구에서는 시장, 공종, 발주형태 및 발주기관 구분에 따라 상관관계분석을 이용한 통계적 분석을 통해 해외건설공사에서 국내 입찰업체 수에 따른 수주성공률과 수익률의 성관관계를 정립하고자 하였다. 이를 위해 입찰허가제가 폐지된 이후 우리 해외건설 수주실적을 조사하여 공공자금을 통한 해외건설공사와 국내하청공사를 제외하고 데이터를 구성하였다. 상관관계를 분석한 결과, 일반적으로 공종 지역 발주형태 발주기관에 따른 입찰업체 수가 증가할수록 수주성공률은 높아지는 반면에 수익률은 낮아지는 것으로 나타났다. 하지만 사업특성에 따른 입찰 업체 수와 수익률 그리고 수주성공률을 고려한 결과 일부 지역과 공종에서는 입찰 업체 수의 감소가 상대적으로 높은 수익률로 이어지지 않는 경향을 보였다. 이러한 사업특성별 구분에 따른 입찰업체 수와 수주 성공률과 수익률의 상관관계에 대한 이해는 해외건설시장에서 국내건설기업의 경쟁력 제고를 위한 특성별 전략 수립 시에 유용한 자료로 활용 될 수 있을 것이다.

• 국제학술발표논문집
• /
• The 3th International Conference on Construction Engineering and Project Management
• /
• pp.1283-1287
• /
• 2009

The Korean government implemented 259 road projects from 2004 to 2007, valued at $18.4 billion. Change orders of these road projects occurred 8,973 times and, subsequently, caused significant increases in the cost of the projects, approximately up to $4.2 billion (22.8% of the initial budget). These significant problems of huge change orders require a more workable control system for budget management whereas the effectiveness of the government's control is still not satisfied. However, previous approaches and studies mostly limited their analyses to simply classifying the causes of the change orders. This paper investigates the real frequency and cost impacts incurred by each cause of a change order, primarily based on 218 road projects in Korea. The paper then identifies the attributes of change orders through a survey of 204 project participants in that those sources were inevitable or avoided if properly managed. The causes of the change orders are further analyzed with analysis of variance (ANOVA) in connection with contract volume, bid award rate, the contractor's capacity to perform, and the design company's capacity. This study found that if the contract volume is smaller, then the possibility of change orders is higher. Interestingly, if the bid award rate is less than 67.5%, it signifies the highest rate of change orders. In addition, the contractors whose construction ability is assessed as the top-ranked group showed the lowest change order rates. With these results, this paper provides the preventive guidelines for reducing the likelihood of change orders.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제14권1호
• /
• pp.245-272
• /
• 2004

This study is focused on the cases that Korean hotels stepped into international airports, public facilities, and successfully solved the contract related disputes by using arbitration in accordance with arbitration law. This case study on arbitration derives the hotel management strategy points as follow: 1. It must be a good chance for a famed hotel to step into international airports that have big publication effect. The feasibility study focused on marketing feasibility rather than finance feasibility may, however, not be good. 2. Written contract is required in entering into a contract with government organizations. However, oral contract still exists. 3. If the contract is made to always pay the higher amount between annual minimal guarantee and sales rate in expenses of store using charge, such contract shall cause very hard sales environment from the initial stage of the contract. 4. The airports have made optional contracts for national service. Such optional contracts are, however, not free from public criticism. 5. This case study is the first case study on arbitration applied to hotels. This study shall be, therefore, frequently referred to in setting a management strategy of hotels that want to run restaurants in another facility outside themselves.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제24권4호
• /
• pp.49-97
• /
• 2014

This study is about the availability of Chinese internal arbitration institutions by Korean invested companies. Generally, Chinese internal arbitration institutions lack independence from government. However, because parties seeking an arbitration award have ways to get neutrality from internal arbitration institutions that guarantee party autonomy, these Korean companies can use Chinese internal arbitration institutions to resolve disputes in China. Special attention should be given to the following. First, because Korean companies invested in China are legally in the same position as Chinese companies, unless foreign-related factors intervene, when disputes occur with Chinese companies or individuals, the disputes correspond to internal dispute, and when it comes to choosing the arbitration institution, these Korean companies must choose either a Chinese internal arbitration institution or foreign-related arbitration institution. Second, most Chinese internal arbitration institutions still lack independence from government, which can influence the fairness of arbitration in the future. Therefore, Korean companies invested in China should think about alternative ways to get a minimum impartiality in arbitration cases. Third, the parties are allowed to choose arbitration rules freely in Beijing, Xian, Chongqing, Guangzhou, and Hangzhou arbitration commissions. Therefore, in arbitration cases, the parties can get impartiality by choosing arbitrators according to the arbitration rules which they agree on, or by choosing partially modified arbitration rules of those arbitration commissions. Fourth, in order to get an impartial arbitration award from Chinese internal arbitration institutions in China, it is important for Korean lawyers or arbitration experts -- fluent in Chinese -- to be registered in the List of Arbitrators of Chinese internal arbitration institution by way of signing a MOU between the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board, or the Korean Association of Arbitration Studies and arbitration commissions such as those of Beijing, Xian, Chongqing, Guangzhou, and Hangzhou which comparatively do guarantee party autonomy. Fifth, because application of the preservation of property before application of arbitration is not approved in China, in practice, in order to preserve property before application of arbitration, it is best to file another suit in China based on other legal issue (e.g., tort) independent from the contract which an arbitration agreement is applied to. Sixth, in arbitration commissions which allow different agreement regarding arbitration procedures or arbitration rules, it is possible to choose a neutral arbitrator from a third country as a presiding arbitrator via UNCITRAL arbitration rules or ICC arbitration rules. Seventh, in the case of Chinese internal arbitral award, because the court reviews the substantive matters to decide the refusal of compulsory execution, the execution rate could be relatively lower than that of foreign-related cases. Therefore, when Korean companies invested in China use Chinese internal arbitration institution, they should endure low rate of execution. Eighth, considering the operational experiences of public policy on foreign-related arbitration awards so far, in cases of Chinese internal arbitration award, the possibility of cancellation of arbitral award or the possibility to refuse to execute the award due to public policy is thought to be higher than that of foreign arbitral awards. Ninth, even though a treaty on judicial assistance in civil and commercial matters has been signed between Korea and China, and it includes a provision on acknowledgement and enforcement of arbitral award, when trying to resolve disputes through Chinese internal arbitration institution, the treaty would not be a big help to resolve the disputes, because the disputes between Korean companies invested in China and the party in China are not subject to the treaty. Tenth, considering recent tendency of conciliation by the arbitral tribunal in China and the voluntary execution rate of the parties, the system of conciliation by the arbitral tribunal is expected to affect as a positive factor the Korean companies that use Chinese internal arbitration institution. Finally, when using online arbitration, arbitration fees can be reduced, and if the arbitration commissions guaranteeing party autonomy have online arbitration system, the possibility of getting impartial arbitration award through them is higher. Therefore, the use of online arbitration system is recommended.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제14권2호
• /
• pp.243-279
• /
• 2004

The construction arbitration field has developed considerably since the latter half of the 1990s. Through analysis of construction arbitration cases taken up by KCAB, this paper intends to show the present condition and the improvement direction of construction arbitration in Korea. The number of construction arbitration cases filed at KCAB has been increasing rapidly after 1997, but recently the rate of increase has tended to decline. From 2000 to 2003 the number of arbitration cases increased 23％ each year, on average, but in 2003 the increase was only 7.6％. In the very beginning, public construction claims made up the majority of all construction cases, however, civil construction claims are increasing gradually. The arbitration amount in the construction field is very high, owing to public construction claims. For example, the arbitration amount per case was 5 billion won, on average,. in the public construction field. It is shown that the claimants of arbitration are mostly constructors and the main reasons for making claims are to demand payment for construction and payment for additional work. KCAB investigated the performance status of arbitration awards. The voluntary performance rate for awards in construction arbitration is nearly 80％ and in 11％, a suit was filed to appeal the arbitration award. In spite of the development of construction arbitration, some improvements are requested. There have been arguments about the effectiveness of selective arbitration agreement in the General Terms of Construction Contract. This has caused a decrease in arbitration cases, so improvements in this dispute settlement clause need to be made. Enforcement of arbitration awards is granted by the judgment of a court. Resulting from this, appeals for arbitration awards are not allowed, however, up to three appeals for the enforcement of awards are allowed in court. As such, the enforcement system for arbitration awards needs to be improved and simplified.