• Journal of the Korean Geographical Society
• /
• v.47 no.2
• /
• pp.245-267
• /
• 2012

This paper analyzes the discrimination of private property right protection in urban regeneration projects that is implemented by eminent domain based on public use in the United States. In spite of urban regeneration projects which depends on property condemnation for public use as a coercive power, it is executed on the discrimination of property right and sacrifice of the social disadvantages that transfer property from these private party to another big capitals and private developers. At first this paper investigates research trends in urban regeneration within the framework of multidisciplinary approach and suggests legal geographical perspective as a new research field. Next I figure out current state, types and numbers of brownfields site with the EPA and GAO data, and define these sites as results of deindustrialization and suburbanization process. Finally this paper uncover that the discrimination process of private property right is due to complex actions of expansion of public use concept in the U.S. Supreme Court from public ownership to economic public use, privatization of eminent domain, growth coalition regime and business friendly policy focused on economic development, class and racial bias, neoliberal movements of property right reform.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.21 no.2
• /
• pp.27-46
• /
• 2011

In the intellectual based society of the 21th century, intellectual property of nation and enterprise management has been the key element of nation's competitiveness and development. Therefore in countries like Korea, China, and many other countries, intellectual property of advancement strategy are being constructed and intellectual properties are protected at national level. Top priority task of protecting the intellectual property is to efficiently resolute intellectual property right disputes. Considering the nature of intellectual property right and arbitrage system, arbitration to solve intellectual property disputes is realistically the best method. However, not all cases of them are qualified. In order to relieve the intellectual property disputes through arbitration, qualification must be obtained. During the process, generally and globally, intellectual property right dispute is evaluated by three parts, intellectual property right contract dispute, intellectual property right violation dispute, and intellectual property right validity dispute. Based on UN's "Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards Agreement" in 1958, June 10th, in New York, both arbitrage organization and judgment can be approved in both Korea and China countries. However, as of today, there is a big gap of arbitration qualification between two countries, which can be troublesome if intellectual property right disputes arise. For instance, in Korea, intellectual property right contract disputes and intellectual property right violation disputes are both generally accepted as arbitration qualification. However for intellectual property right validity dispute, arbitration qualification is only accepted for non-registered intellectual property as in copyright entity. It does not apply to other registered intellectual property right as in patents. In China, arbitration qualification is accepted for intellectual property right contract dispute, and also accepted for intellectual property right violation dispute to copyrights but restricted to others. As for intellectual property right validity dispute, arbitration qualification is completely denied. Therefore, when there is an intellectual property right dispute between Korea and China, the biggest problem is whether China will accept arbitrage judgments made in Korea. Theoretically, arbitrage judgement made in Korea should be also accepted in China's court. However, considering the criticism of China's passive nature of arbitration qualification for its own local intellectual property right disputes, it's very unlikely they'll actively accept arbitrary judgment made in foreign countries. Korea and China must have a more open minded approach for intellectual property disputes and arbitration qualification. Base on WTO's Intellectual Property Right Agreement, it's being defined as private right. Therefore, sovereign principle should be the basic principle of solving intellectual property right disputes. Currently, arbitration qualification is expanding internationally. So both Korea and China must also follow the trend expand the arbitration qualification with a more open minded and forward looking approach, for the good of intellectual property disputes.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.18 no.3
• /
• pp.117-138
• /
• 2008

This study lies on building the International Standardization of China Arbitration System for improving a relationship of mutual trust and the safety trade between China and other worldwide countries, especially, South Korea as their one of the biggest trading partners through the comparative analysis of China and UNCITRAL Arbitration Law. In this analysis, the differences from China and UNCITRAL in arbitration law are like belows ; lack of arbitrator's international mind, the limitation of private property right, prohibition of Ad. hoc arbitration, arbitrator's biased nationalism, localism, and their short specialties. a deficiency of the objectiveness for arbitrator's election, a judgement rejection of claimants by using nonattendance and walkout, impossibility of prior and temporary property custody for execution of arbitration award. etc. For the improvement of the International Standardization of China Arbitration, this paper propose as follows: 1) Extension of private property right, reorganization of tax system, realization of open competition, exclusion of 'Sinocentrism', globalization of arbitration system 2) The abolition of old fashioned bureaucracy with approval for ad.hoc arbitration 3) An education for arbitrator's internationalization, specialty, and to promote legal knowledge 4) A settlement of the third country arbitrators' selection for reflecting interested party's decision by the court in a selection system of arbitration committee. 5) Institutionalization of arbitration judgment that prevent for claimant's avoidance by using a withdrawal and an intentional absent 6) A permission of the right of claimant's court custody directly before the begging of arbitration request for the prevention for destruction of evidence and property concealment 7) Grant of the arbitration tribunal's interim measures of protection for private property preservation to the third party, proof security, prevention from the loss that selling the corruptible goods 8) Improvement of arbitration's efficiency from the exclusion of the obstacles that are forgery, concealed evidence, and arbitrator's bribe taking Lastly, I hope that this study will serve to promote friendly economic relationship between China and South Korea and strive for international equilibrium through the achievement of China Arbitration's International Standardization. I will finish this paper with a firm belief that this will lead to more advanced studies.

• THE INTERNATIONAL COMMERCE & LAW REVIEW
• /
• v.52
• /
• pp.3-22
• /
• 2011

This study examines the seller's liability to transfer the property to the buyer. Even though contracting parties choose CISG as the governing law regulating their obligations and rights by means of their contract, CISG does not concern with the effect generated by the transfer of property. Thus, the issues of the property is settled in conformity with the domestic law applicable by virtue of the rules of private international law. By considering the general rules of the transfer of property in goods under SGA and KCC as the lex rei sitae, the difference of requirements to pass the property between them is analyzed and then the reasons why the transfer of property is importantly considered are discussed. In addition, as CISG does not exclude completely the matters concerning the property and provides the provision like Art 41, the seller's liability to deliver goods free from the third party right or claim is examined under Art 41. Lastly, the practical advice is suggested.

• Journal of the Society of Disaster Information
• /
• v.7 no.3
• /
• pp.229-239
• /
• 2011

The private investigator service in Korea is to protect our legal market from personal right, creation of job, legal opening via OECD and FTA as well as the prevention of negative private investigation such as service center and private investigator operated without any control. Therefore, this study compares the civil research systems of advanced countries, reviews the legal process to introduce private investigator service as well as considers the previous studies to suggest the work sectors of private investigator service appropriate to Korea. As a result, it distinguished the private investigation work into corporate, finance, insurance, medical service, Cyber, traffic accidents, intellectual property right, lost and forensic science.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.11 no.1_2
• /
• pp.115-155
• /
• 1980

Nowadays managers of fisheries enterprises and users of accounting information have a considerable interest in the fishery right. The fishery right, which is given by administrative quarters, is referred to exclusive fishing right in a certain coastal fishing ground, and it has been one of the property rights since the turn of the century. The main purpose of this study is to provide an improved accounting method of the fishery right from the side of accounting. To achieve this purpose, legal nature of the fishery right should be understood in the first place, for the fishery right, an intangible asset, is a sort of property right guaranteed by the fisheries laws, According to the basic law in the fisheries "Fisheries Law, " the fishery right is broken down largely into three categories; culture fishing right, set fishing right and common fishing right. The legal characteristics of these fishery rights are as followings: 1. The fishery right is a private right. 2. The fishery right is a property right. 3. The fishery right is a right in rem, and legal provisions pertaining to land are applied to the fishery right with necessary modifications. In addition to the above fishery rights, the Fisheries Law provides some provisions on the so-called entrance right, and those who obtained the right are authorized to access to a certain common fishing right fishing ground where they have been traditionally fishing. In the inland fisheries, the fishery right system similar to that of the coastal fisheries discussed above is adopted in conformity with the Inland Fisheries Developing and Expediting Law. Viewing from an angle of accounting, there are two kinds of additional fishing rights which are dealt as assets. These fishery rights dealt as asset include the license of entry in the so-called permitted fishing which is also called as fishery right in plain language, and tile entrance right obtained abroad. Although these two kinds of rights are not the fishery right from a viewpoint of law, they are regarded as fishing rights in accounting which intends to provide a useful economic information.formation.

• Journal of Navigation and Port Research
• /
• v.32 no.3
• /
• pp.257-264
• /
• 2008

This study is intended to know what is the legal problems to settlement and public announcement of property right for construction of marine architectural building in Korea. Firstly, the situation and the prospect around marine architectural building are examined Secondly, the legal concepts of marine architectural building and the application of related laws are analyzed. Thirdly, the problems related to public announcement of property right of marine architectural building are suggested. Fourthly, some improvement schemes to solve the legal problems in relation with property right of buildings on the water at sea and ocean are proposed. As the conclusion, the marine architectural building can be divided into fixed-type and floating-type in order to find the proper way to handle the public announcement of property right for that sort of building. The fixed-typecan be registered as real estate according to the Building Law through the amendment of the existing related laws. But for the registration of floating-type building a new law should be made. In the near future, improvements on the legal system related with the settlement of property right of marine architectural building should be made, so that private sectors can join construction and operation of the building. Especially a new law for the floating-type marine architectural building should be made as soon as possible.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.14 no.1
• /
• pp.133-156
• /
• 2004

The rapid development of the internet may not have occurred without techniques of linking and framing, which provide users flexible and easy access to other website. These techniques have enabled internet users to navigate the internet efficiently and sort through the products, services and information available on the internet. The Advent of the global information structure and the do-called EC revolution raise countless new issues and questions. There are no limitations regulating the expressions on the cyberspace due to internet's of quality anonymity? diversity? spontaneity. Therefore, the freedom of speech is expanded in both areas of time and space, which was impossible with the old communicating system. Although online technology raises many new legal issues, the law available to help us resolve them, at least today, is largely based on the world as it existed before online commerce became a reality. Thus the challenge is to predict how these new legal issues may be resolved using the current law. As a result of the drastic change of the environment for international trade of which that has taken took place in parallel with the global information technology revolution on a global basis, the scope of issues to be addressed which should be resolved by the conflict of laws principles has been remarkably expanded, and various new issues of an entirely which are quite new in its type and nature have arisen been raised. Further more in addition, the old act prior act was regarded as insufficient in that it lacked rules on international governing law to adjudicate, or international adjudicatory governing law, where as the expectation of the public was that the private international law should function as the basic law of the legal relational encompassing rules on governing law given the increase of It international disputes. for the move the private international law has also attracted more attention from the korean.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.25 no.1
• /
• pp.237-259
• /
• 2010

This paper first gives a brief overview of the history of space law making in the international geopolitical context and recalls some of the main principles as elaborated in the framework of the United Nations. Next, several topics are discussed that will require the attention of space lawyers in the near future. They are the International Space Station, space debris, exploitation of space resources, space tourism, private property rights in space, and militarization and weaponization of space. The paper raises some questions in each of these areas that need to be addressed and concludes that the general legal framework for space activities under public international law as contained in the UN treaties is in place, and is sufficiently general and flexible to enable and encourage states to carry out space activities in an orderly manner. However, as demonstrated by the examples discussed in the paper, the time has come for the international community to agree on the further development of these general principles, starting perhaps with space debris, imminent 'new' uses of space such as space tourism, or some of the 'age old' issues such as the weaponisation of outer space that will continue to require our attention and vigilance. Whether such rules can be in the form of non binding guidelines, codes of conduct and the like, or should be embodied in solid legal instruments creating rights and obligations remains to be seen.

• Journal of Korean Philosophical Society
• /
• v.141
• /
• pp.133-166
• /
• 2017

The main aim of this paper is to show why justice is based on convention, not nature, in David Hume. Most philosopher, since Aristotle, have considered justice in relation to distribution. This understanding of justice continues up to modern times, and is handled especially in relation to ownership or private property in modern times. In modern times, private property is regarded as an absolute right that should not be violated in any case. Hume identifies this private property with justice. The absolute inviolability of private property is equivalent to never violate to justice. Hume is concerned with the question of where this justice originate. In other words, Hume is not concerned with the Kantian justification of justice, but rather with the psychological discussion of the genesis process of the idea of justice. Hume's answer is that "social utility" is its origin. Public societies are necessary conditions for human being. In other words, if public societies do not exist, humans can not exist. How then can a public society, which is a prerequisite for human being, exist or can be maintained? According to Hume, it is maintained by means of justice. So where is the ground for justice? Hume argues that the basis of justice is not nature, but human conventions. Man accepts justice tacitly and by doing so man can maintains his being. This is a rough insight of Hume. Hume uses a wide variety of concepts to carry out his argument. In this paper, we focus on how the idea of justice in human mind, based on these various concepts presented by Hume, is formed.