Changes and Challenges in the Concept of Industrial Accident Insurance in Korea (산업재해 인정 형태 변화와 보상체계 합리화 연구)
-
- Korean Journal of Social Welfare
- /
- v.59 no.3
- /
- pp.59-73
- /
- 2007
The compensation system in industrial accident insurance is systemized with "either receiving all or no benefits at all" according to "admited or denied as an industrial accident". Therefore, they are centered on the decision as "industrial accident" or "non-industrial accident", but judging between the two is very complicated, and has inherent conflicting factors. In the early stage of industrialization, industrial accident compensation was based on the indemnity liability for employer's faults. In order to be compensated any damage, the injured worker should prove that the accident was not due to his or her faults. However it was very difficult for injured worker or his or her family to prove the employer's faults, so it was almost impossible to get compensation. Thereafter industrialization progress and improvement of workers' political status lead to conversion from principle of liability with employer's faults to principle of liability without employer's faults. In addition to that, coverage of industrial accident compensation was also expanded. This improvement strengthened the benefit payment principle of "All or Nothing". Even though the "All or Nothing" principle provokes tremendous criticism, the reason why it's difficult for industrialized countries to adopt partial compensation system, is that partial compensation system worsens the administrative hardship, therefore industrialized countries overcome the restrictions of the "All or Nothing" principle with making balance in provisions for any risk to some extent. However, in Korea because the general compensation system for covering medical cost and income loss from accidents, is not equipped, it could be possible to cause acute conflicts with regard to coverage of industrial accidents. Therefore it is required to improve the industrial accident insurance with the acceptance of the significance and logic of discriminated compensation, and create the integrated compensation system in the long run.
Cheng Yi(程?, 1033~1107) understood that nature is full of "changes(易)". And he noted that human being as part of nature also exists only in a series of changes, i.e. birth, growth, extinction and death. All things including human being arise from the same principle, or "Heavenly Principle." Hence human being can fundamentally be one with all other beings, or nature. It is called "Unity of all things(萬物一體)" and "Unity of heaven and human(天人合一)." This philosophical perspective cannot be regarded as being unique to Cheng only; neo-Confucian predecessors called "the five masters of the Northern Song(北宋五子)" anticipated Cheng's vision already. Nevertheless, Cheng elaborated on the shared vision, revealing his philosophical uniqueness. Cheng maintains that only human being receives the principle in the unstained form, and thereby is capable of being one with nature. The one who realizes her/his potential to be one with nature is a sage(聖人); for Cheng, the order and pattern found in nature is nothing other than moral principle that human beings have to live up to and vice versa. Cheng's idea on the principle which human being receives from Heaven no doubt relates to Mencian notion of the innate goodness of human nature(性善); the innate goodness of human nature is no other than Heavenly Principle, and to become a sage depends on whether one can realize her/his potential - human nature, i.e. Heavenly Principle in her/himself. For Cheng, human nature tantamount to Heavenly Principle has no evil quality; all the evil in the world comes from imperfect "physical endowment(氣質)," or "capacity(才)" which is various from person to person, making various personalities. Accordingly, the task of moral cultivation in Cheng's theory can translate into the matter of rectification of one's physical endowment.
The theory of post-heaven provided Korea's many emerging national religions with spiritual ground. The I Ching originated in China emphasizes the principles of change or static aspects of world, while Right I Ching, which Il-Bu Kim suggested, underlines dynamic aspects of world. Il-Bu Kim is perceived to open a new stage in the history of philosophy of I Ching in this regard. His most remarkable contribution is the view of Great Opening Era of Post-Heaven, according to which the clock of cosmos shows the era of great change from Pre-Heaven to Post-Heaven and in the world of Post-Heaven everything will take its proper place. As to human society, Il-Bu Kim foresaw the change from disharmony to harmony, imbalance to balance and era of xiaoren to that of junzi. The advent of such a new world, however, asks human's moral revolution as a prerequisite. In the tradition of East Asian thought, human is the center of the Samjae, Heaven-Earth-Human and the only being which could participate in the growth of Heaven and Earth. Without the change of human mind, however, human can neither participate in the growth of Heaven and Earth nor expect the right change of Heaven and Earth. Even though the world of nature changes according to the principle of cosmic harmony, as the Right I Ching predicts, the real change of Heaven and Earth can be achieved only with moral change of human. The human in the Right I Ching is a free man who sticks to nothing and communicates with cosmos with empty mind. This is the very image of perfect man(至人). The perfect man in the Right I Ching is the main agent of everything, that's to say, the main agent of the great opening to Post-Heaven Era. This is the reason why most leaders of Koran emerging religions concentrate on the change of human. In this regard, Jeung-San Kang encouraged people to become the perfect man through the purification of mind and body and the great opening of inner man, depending on the metaphysical principle of the Right I Ching. Cheok and Resolution of grievances for the mutual beneficence of all life are what he suggested as a method of the great opening of inner man. Such a view is based on the thought that the accumulated sinful behaviors are obstacles to cosmic change and the time of mutual beneficience opens with the removal of the obstacles. If such religious practices are so effective, as Jeung-San Kang says, that future world could consist of perfect men who have achived the great opening of inner man, moral change, and change of consciousness, we could expect that the activities of xiaoren will be shrinked and junzi will be welcomed, as the Right I Ching predicts.
In a seminal judgment of November 2002 (Case C-476/98) relating to the compatibility with Community laws of the 'nationality clause' in the 1996 amending protocol to the 1955 U.S.-German Air Services Agreement, the European Court of Justice(ECJ) decided that the provision constituted a measure of an intrinsically discriminatory nature and was thus contrary to the principle of national treatment established under Art. 52 of the EC Treaty. The Court, rejecting bluntly the German government' submissions relying on public policy grounds(Art. 56, EC Treaty), seemed content to declare and rule that the protocol provision requiring a contracting state party to ensure substantial ownership and effective control by its nationals of its designated airlines had violated the requirement of national treatment reserved for other Community Members under the salient Treaty provision. The German counterclaims against the Commission, although tantalizing not only from the perusal of the judgment but from the perspective of international air law, were nonetheless invariably correct and to the point. For such a clause has been justified to defend the 'fundamental interests of society from a serious threat' that may result from granting operating licenses or necessary technical authorizations to an airline company of a third country. Indeed, the nationality clause has been inserted in most of the liberal bilaterals to allow the parties to enforce their own national laws and regulations governing aviation safety and security. Such a clause is not targeted as a device for discriminating against the nationals of any third State. It simply acts as the minimum legal safeguards against aviation risk empowering a party to take legal control of the designated airlines. Unfortunately, the German call for the review of such a foremost objective and rationale underlying the nationality clause landed on the deaf ears of the Court which appeared quite happy not to take stock of the potential implications and consequences in its absence and of the legality under international law of the 'national treatment' requirement of Community laws. Again, while US law limits foreign shareholders to 24.9% of its airlines, the European Community limits non-EC ownership to 49%, precluding any ownership and effective control by foreign nationals of EC airlines, let alone any foreign takeover and merger. Given this, it appears inconsistent and unreasonable for the EC to demand,
English contract law has traditionally taken the view that it is not the duty of the parties to a contract to give information voluntarily to each other. In English law, one of the principal distinctions between insurance contract law and general contract law is the existence of the doctrine of utmost good faith in insurance law. The doctrine gives rise to a variety of duties, some of which apply before formation of the contract while others apply post-formation. This article is, therefore, designed to analyse the overall structure and problems of the doctrine of utmost good faith in English marine insurance law. The results of analysis are as following : First, the requirement of utmost good faith in marine insurance law arises from the fact that many of the relevant circumstances are within the exclusive knowledge of the assured and it is impossible for the insurer to obtain the facts to make a appropriate calculation of the risk that he is asked to assume without this information. Secondly, the duty of utmost good faith provided in MIA 1906, s. 17 has the nature as a bilateral or reciprocal, overriding and absolute duty. Thirdly, the Court of Appeal in Skandia held that breach of the pre-formation duty of utmost good faith did not sound in damages since the duty did not arise out of an implied contractual term and the breach did not constitute a tort. Instead, the Court of Appeal held that the duty was an extra-contractual duty imposed by law in the form of a contingent condition precedent to the enforceability of the contract. Fourthly, the scope of the duty of utmost good faith is closely related to the test of materiality and the assured is required to disclose only material circumstances subject to MIA 1906, s. 18(1) and 20(1). The test of materiality, which had caused a great deal of debate in English courts over 30 years, was finally settled by the House of Lords in Pan Atlantic and the House of Lords rejected the 'decisive influence' test and the 'increased risk' test, and the decision of the House of Lords is thought to accept the 'mere influence' test in subsequent case by the Court of Appeal. Fifthly, the insurer is, in order to avoid contract, required to provide proof that he is induced to enter into the contract by reason of the non-disclosure or misrepresentation of the assured. Sixthly, the duty of utmost good faith is, in principle, terminated before contract is concluded, but it is undoubtful that the provision under MIA 1906, s. 17 is wide enough to include the post-formation duty. The post-formation duty is, however, based upon the terms of marine insurance contract, and the duty lies entirely outside s. 17. Finally, MIA 1906, s. 17 provides expressly for the remedy of avoidance of the contract for breach of the duty. This means rescission or retrospective avoidance of the entire contract, and the remedy is based upon a fairly crude 'all-or-nothing' approach. What is needed in English marine insurance law is to introduce a more sophiscated or proportionate remedy.
There is nothing more important than the form and function in design, because every design product can be done on the basis of them. Form and Function are already existed before the word of design has been appeared and all the natural and man-made things' basic organization is based on their organic relations. The organic relations is the source of vitality which identifies the subsistance of all the objects and the evolution of living creatures has been changed their appearances by the natural law and order. Design is no exception. Design is a man-made organic thing which is developed its own way according to the purposed aim and given situations. If so, what is the ultimate goal of design. It is without saying that the goal is to make every effort to contribute to the -human beings most desirable life by the designer who is devoting himself to their convenience and well-being. Therefore, the designer can be called the man of rich life practitioner. This word implies a lot of meanings since the essence of design is improving the guality of life by the man-made things which are created by the designer. Also, the things are existed through the relations between form and function, and the things can keep their value when they are answered to the right purpose. In design, thus, it is to be a main concern how to create valuable things and to use them in the right way, and the subject of study is focused on the designer's outlook of value and uk relations between form and function. Christopher Alexander mentioned the importance of form as follows. The ultimate object of design is form. Every design problem begins with an effort to achieve fittness between the form and its context. The form is the solution to the problem: the context defmes the problem. In other words, when we speak of design, the real object of discussion is not form alone, but the ensemble comprising the form and its context. Good fit is a desirable property of this ensemble which relates to some particular division of the ensemble into form and context. Max Bill mainatined how important form is in design. Form represents a self-contained concept, and its embodiment in an object results in that object becoming a work of art. Futhermore, this explains why we use form so freguently in a comparative sense for determining whether one thing is less or more beautiful than another, and why the ideal of absolute beauty is always the standard by which we appraise form, and through form, art itself. Hence form has became synonymous with beauty. On the other hand, Laszlo Moholy-Nagy stated the importance of function as follows. Function means the task an object is designed to fulfill the task instrument is shaping the form. Unfortunately, this principle was not appreciated at the same time but through the endeavors of Frank Lloyd Wright and of the Bauhaus group and its many collegues in Europe, the idea of functionalism became the keynote of the twenites. Functionalism soon became a cheap slogan, however, and its original meaning blurred. It is neccessary to reexamine it in the light of present circumstances. Charles William Eliot expressed his idea on the relations between function and beauty. Beauty often results chiefly from fittness: indeed it is easy to manitain that nothing is fair except what is fit its uses or functions. If the function of the product of a machine be useful and valuable, an the machine be eminently fit for its function, it conspicuously has the beauty of fittness. A locomotive or a steamship has the same sort of beauty, derived from the supreme fittness for its function. As functions vary, so will those beauty..vary. However, it is impossible to study form and function in separate beings. Function can't be existed without form, and without function, form is nothing. In other words, form is a function's container, and function is content in form. It can be said that, therefore, the form and function are indispensable and commensal individuals which have coetemal relations. From the different point of view, sometimes, one is more emphasized than the other, but in this case, the logic is only accepted on the assumption of recognizing the importance of the other's entity. The fact can be proved what Frank Hoyd wright said that form and function are one. In spite of that, the form and function should be considered as independent indivisuals, because they are too important to be treated just as the simple single one. Form and function have flexible properties to the context. In other words, the context plays a role as the barometer to define the form and function, also which implies every meaning of surroun'||'&'||'not;dings. Thus, design is formed under the influence of situations. Situations are dynamic, like the design process itself, in which fixed focus can be cripping. Moreover, situations control over making the good design. Judging from the respect, I defined the good design in my thesis An Analytic Research on Desigh Ethic, "good design is to solve the problem by the most proper way in the situations." Situations are changeable, and so is design. There is no progress without change, but change is not neccessarily progress. It is highly desirable that there changes be beneficial to mankind. Our main problem is to be able to discriminate between that which should be discarded and that which should be kept, built upon, and improved. Form and Function are no exception. The practical function gives birth to the inevitable form and the
Land was originally communized by a community in the primitive society of Korea, and in the age of the ancient society SAM KUK-SILLA, KOKURYOE and PAEK JE-it was distributed under the principle of land-nationalization. But by the occupation of the lands which were permitted to transmit from generation to generation as Royal Grant Lands and newly cleared lands, the private occupation had already begun to be formed. Thus the private ownership of land originated by chiefs of the tribes had a trend to be gradually pervaded to the communal members. After the, SILLA Kingdom unified SAM KUK in 668 A.D., JEONG JEON System and KWAN RYO JEON System, which were the distribution systems of farmlands originated from the TANG Dynasty in China, were enforced to established the basis of an absolute monarchy. Even in this age the forest area was jointly controlled and commonly used by village communities because of the abundance of area and stocked volume, and the private ownership of the forest land was prohibited by law under the influence of the TANG Dynasty system. Toward the end of the SILLA Dynasty, however, as its centralism become weak, the tendency of the private occupancy of farmland by influential persons was expanded, and at the same time the occupancy of the forest land by the aristocrats and Buddhist temples began to come out. In the ensuing KORYO Dynasty (519 to 1391 A.D.) JEON SI KWA System under the principle of land-nationalization was strengthened and the privilege of tax collection was transferred to the bureaucrats and the aristocrats as a means of material compensation for them. Taking this opportunity the influential persons began to expand their lands for the tax collection on a large scale. Therefore, about in the middle of 11th century the farmlands and the forest lands were annexed not only around the vicinity of the capital but also in the border area by influential persons. Toward the end of the KORYO Dynasty the royal families, the bureaucrats and the local lords all possessed manors and occupied the forest lands on a large scale as a part of their farmlands. In the KORYO Dynasty, where national economic foundation was based upon the lands, the disorder of the land system threatened the fall of the Dynasty and so the land reform carried out by General YI SEONG-GYE had led to the creation of ensuing YI Dynasty. All systems of the YI Dynasty were substantially adopted from those of the KORYO Dynasty and thereby KWA JEON System was enforced under the principle of land-nationalization, while the occupancy or the forest land was strictly prohibited, except the national or royal uses, by the forbidden item in KYEONG JE YUK JEON SOK JEON, one of codes provided by the successive kings in the YI Dynasty. Thus the basis of the forest land system through the YI Dynasty had been established, while the private forest area possessed by influential persons since the previous KORYO Dynasty was preserved continuously under the influence of their authorities. Therefore, this principle of the prohibition was nothing but a legal fiction for the security of sovereign powers. Consequently the private occupancy of the forest area was gradually enlarged and finally toward the end of YI Dynasty the privately possessed forest lands were to be officially authorized. The forest administration systems in the YI Dynasty are summarized as follows: a) KEUM SAN and BONG SAN. Under the principle of land-nationalization by a powerful centralism KWA JEON System was established at the beginning of the YI Dynasty and its government expropriated all the forests and prohibited strictly the private occupation. In order to maintain the dignity of the royal capital, the forests surounding capital areas were instituted as KEUM SAN (the reserved forests) and the well-stocked natural forest lands were chosen throughout the nation by the government as BONG SAN(national forests for timber production), where the government nominated SAN JIK(forest rangers) and gave them duties to protect and afforest the forests. This forest reservation system exacted statute labors from the people of mountainious districts and yet their commons of the forest were restricted rigidly. This consequently aroused their strong aversion against such forest reservation, therefore those forest lands were radically spoiled by them. To settle this difficult problem successive kings emphasized the preservation of the forests repeatedly, and in KYEONG KUK DAI JOEN, the written constitution of the YI Dynasty, a regulation for the forest preservation was provided but the desired results could not be obtained. Subsequently the split of bureaucrats with incessant feuds among politicians and scholars weakened the centralism and moreover, the foreign invasions since 1592 made the national land devasted and the rural communities impoverished. It happned that many wandering peasants from rural areas moved into the deep forest lands, where they cultivated burnt fields recklessly in the reserved forest resulting in the severe damage of the national forests. And it was inevitable for the government to increase the number of BONG SAN in order to solve the problem of the timber shortage. The increase of its number accelerated illegal and reckless cutting inevitably by the people living mountainuos districts and so the government issued excessive laws and ordinances to reserve the forests. In the middle of the 18th century the severe feuds among the politicians being brought under control, the excessive laws and ordinances were put in good order and the political situation became temporarily stabilized. But in spite of those endeavors evil habitudes of forest devastation, which had been inveterate since the KORYO Dynasty, continued to become greater in degree. After the conclusion of "the Treaty of KANG WHA with Japan" in 1876 western administration system began to be adopted, and thereafter through the promulgation of the Forest Law in 1908 the Imperial Forests were separated from the National Forests and the modern forest ownership system was fixed. b) KANG MU JANG. After the reorganization of the military system, attaching importance to the Royal Guard Corps, the founder of the YI Dynasty, TAI JO (1392 to 1398 A.D.) instituted the royal preserves-KANG MU JANG-to attain the purposes for military training and royal hunting, prohibiting strictly private hunting, felling and clearing by the rural inhabitants. Moreover, the tyrant, YEON SAN (1495 to 1506 A.D.), expanded widely the preserves at random and strengthened its prohibition, so KANG MU JANG had become the focus of the public antipathy. Since the invasion of Japanese in 1592, however, the innovation of military training methods had to be made because of the changes of arms and tactics, and the royal preserves were laid aside consequently and finally they had become the private forests of influential persons since 17th century. c) Forests for official use. All the forests for official use occupied by government officies since the KORYO Dynasty were expropriated by the YI Dynasty in 1392, and afterwards the forests were allotted on a fixed standard area to the government officies in need of firewoods, and as the forest resources became exhausted due to the depredated forest yield, each office gradually enlarged the allotted area. In the 17th century the national land had been almost devastated by the Japanese invasion and therefore each office was in the difficulty with severe deficit in revenue, thereafter waste lands and forest lands were allotted to government offices inorder to promote the land clearing and the increase in the collections of taxes. And an abuse of wide occupation of the forests by them was derived and there appeared a cause of disorder in the forest land system. So a provision prohibiting to allot the forests newly official use was enacted in 1672, nevertheless the government offices were trying to enlarge their occupied area by encroaching the boundary and this abuse continued up to the end of the YI Dynasty. d) Private forests. The government, at the bigninning of the YI Dynasty, expropriated the forests all over the country under the principle of prohibition of private occupancy of forest lands except for the national uses, while it could not expropriate completely all of the forest lands privately occupied and inherited successively by bureaucrats, and even local governors could not control them because of their strong influences. Accordingly the King, TAI JONG (1401 to 1418 A.D.), legislated the prohibition of private forest occupancy in his code, KYEONG JE YUK JEON (1413), and furthermore he repeatedly emphasized to observe the law. But The private occupancy of forest lands was not yet ceased up at the age of the King, SE JO (1455 to 1468 A.D.), so he prescribed the provision in KYEONG KUK DAI JEON (1474), an immutable law as a written constitution in the YI Dynasty: "Anyone who privately occupy the forest land shall be inflicted 80 floggings" and he prohibited the private possession of forest area even by princes and princesses. But, it seemed to be almost impossible for only one provsion in a code to obstruct the historical growing tendecy of private forest occupancy, for example, the King, SEONG JONG (1470 to 1494 A.D.), himself granted the forests to his royal families in defiance of the prohibition and thereafter such precedents were successively expanded, and besides, taking advantage of these facts, the influential persons openly acquired their private forest lands. After tyrannical rule of the King, YEON SAN (1945 to 1506 A.D.), the political disorder due to the splits to bureaucrats with successional feuds and the usurpations of thrones accelerated the private forest occupancy in all parts of the country, thus the forbidden clause on the private forest occupancy in the law had become merely a legal fiction since the establishment of the Dynasty. As above mentioned, after the invasion of Japanese in 1592, the courts of princes (KUNG BANGG) fell into the financial difficulties, and successive kings transferred the right of tax collection from fisherys and saltfarms to each KUNG BANG and at the same time they allotted the forest areas in attempt to promote the clearing. Availing themselves of this opportunity, royal families and bureaucrats intended to occupy the forests on large scale. Besides a privilege of free selection of grave yard, which had been conventionalized from the era of the KORYO Dynasty, created an abuse of occuping too wide area for grave yards in any forest at their random, so the King, TAI JONG, restricted the area of grave yard and homestead of each family. Under the policy of suppresion of Buddhism in the YI Dynasty a privilege of taxexemption for Buddhist temples was deprived and temple forests had to follow the same course as private forests did. In the middle of 18th century the King, YEONG JO (1725 to 1776 A.D.), took an impartial policy for political parties and promoted the spirit of observing laws by putting royal orders and regulations in good order excessively issued before, thus the confused political situation was saved, meanwhile the government officially permittd the private forest ownership which substantially had already been permitted tacitly and at the same time the private afforestation areas around the grave yards was authorized as private forests at least within YONG HO (a boundary of grave yard). Consequently by the enforcement of above mentioned policies the forbidden clause of private forest ownership which had been a basic principle of forest system in the YI Dynasty entireely remained as only a historical document. Under the rule of the King, SUN JO (1801 to 1834 A.D.), the political situation again got into confusion and as the result of the exploitation from farmers by bureaucrats, the extremely impoverished rural communities created successively wandering peasants who cleared burnt fields and deforested recklessly. In this way the devastation of forests come to the peak regardless of being private forests or national forests, moreover, the influential persons extorted private forests or reserved forests and their expansion of grave yards became also excessive. In 1894 a regulation was issued that the extorted private forests shall be returned to the initial propriators and besides taking wide area of the grave yards was prohibited. And after a reform of the administrative structure following western style, a modern forest possession system was prepared in 1908 by the forest law including a regulation of the return system of forest land ownership. At this point a forbidden clause of private occupancy of forest land got abolished which had been kept even in fictitious state since the foundation of the YI Dynasty. e) Common forests. As above mentioned, the forest system in the YI Dynasty was on the ground of public ownership principle but there was a high restriction to the forest profits of farmers according to the progressive private possession of forest area. And the farmers realized the necessity of possessing common forest. They organized village associations, SONGE or KEUM SONGE, to take the ownerless forests remained around the village as the common forest in opposition to influential persons and on the other hand, they prepared the self-punishment system for the common management of their forests. They made a contribution to the forest protection by preserving the common forests in the late YI Dynasty. It is generally known that the absolute monarchy expr opriates the widespread common forests all over the country in the process of chainging from thefeudal society to the capitalistic one. At this turning point in Korea, Japanese colonialists made public that the ratio of national and private forest lands was 8 to 2 in the late YI Dynasty, but this was merely a distorted statistics with the intention of rationalizing of their dispossession of forests from Korean owners, and they took advantage of dead forbidden clause on the private occupancy of forests for their colonization. They were pretending as if all forests had been in ownerless state, but, in truth, almost all the forest lands in the late YI Dynasty except national forests were in the state of private ownership or private occupancy regardless of their lawfulness.