• 한국컴퓨터정보학회논문지
• /
• 제26권10호
• /
• pp.147-155
• /
• 2021

행정청을 상대로 소송을 제기하려는 경우 민사소송으로 할 것인지, 행정소송으로 할 것인지를 정해야 한다. 소송의 종류가 정해져야 어느 법원에 소송을 제기할 것인지를 판단할 수 있다. 우리나라는 공법상의 법률관계를 대상으로 하는 것은 행정소송, 사법상의 법률관계를 대상으로 하는 것은 민사소송으로 그 구별이 명확한 것처럼 보이지만 공법상의 당사자소송과 민사소송은 공.사법의 구별에 관하여 주체설을 취하지 않는 한 구별이 쉽지 않다. 소송실무나 판례는 '당해 소송물이 공법상의 법률관계에 속하는 것인지, 사법상의 법률관계에 속하는 것인지를 구별기준으로 하여 일명 소송물설을 취하고 있어 그 구별은 늘 어려운 과제이다. 행정소송법에 직무관할지정관련 조항을 신설하여 '소송사건이 행정소송인지 민사소송인지 여부가 문제된 경우에는 대법원이 관계된 법원 또는 당사자의 신청에 따라 결정으로 관할법원을 지정한다.' 라고 규정한다면 하급심으로서도 부담을 줄이고 당사자들은 신속한 재판을 받을 권리를 보장받게 되고, 소송대리인들로서도 형식적인 절차로 인한 소모적 고뇌로부터 해방될 수 있다고 생각한다.

• 환경영향평가
• /
• 제10권3호
• /
• pp.195-209
• /
• 2001

The objective of this study is intended to propose plans for reforming environmental impact assessment(EIA) systems by reviewing the current legal systems of EIA related laws and their implementation status in Korea, and by comparing the Korean situation to EIA systems in several foreign countries. This study tried to integrate all EIA related systems scattered over several laws into one comprehensive EIA law, and also to develop legal procedures necessary to accomplish the legislative purpose of the integrated EIA law. Therefore, I propose four reforms (1) All EIA systems should be integrated into one comprehensive EIA act. (2) Administrative plans and policies, though environmentally harmful, which are not currently subject to any prior consultation system, should be covered by the prior consultation system. (3) A screening or scoping should be adopted. (4) Widen civil participation should be encouraged and the administrative control enforcement and introduction of group litigation or citizen suits would be considered.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• 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

• 의료법학
• /
• 제14권2호
• /
• pp.11-41
• /
• 2013

Article 347 of criminal law provides the act of deceiving another, thereby taking property or obtaining pecuniary advantage from another. On the other hand, the concepts of fraud and abuse are confused upon interpretation since the definition in National Healthcare Insurance Law is unclear, and it affects closely to the administrative measures such as surcharge levy by the period of inspection, therefore, the disputes continue in the forms of formal objection, administrative ruling and administrative litigation. This study aims to look over the legal problems on application of criminal fraud toward the abuse of 'Paid Medical Expenses(Article 57, Sections 1 and 4 of the National Health Insurance Act)'. The main issues are concept of abuse(Article 57, Sections 1 and 4 of the National Health Insurance Act), the problems of Directions of Health-Welfare Ministry on aspect of 'Nullum crimen sine lege' Principles, the proper sentenc-ing guidelines of fraud.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제77권
• /
• pp.91-112
• /
• 2018

Mediation is one of several alternatives to litigation or arbitration. It is the most informal of the alternatives and the only one that gives the parties control over the outcome. The mediator in mediation is there to help the parties persuade each other that it is in their best interests to settle. As several advantages of mediation, it is considered as the fastest way to resolve a dispute because procedures associated with litigation are not imported into the process. In mediation, the client's resources are focused on resolving the dispute as opposed to building armaments of evidence to buttress legal and factual positions. The AAA commercial mediation rules and operations in the USA are very successful owing to professional training for mediators and simple procedures for mediation to the public. Comparison with USA mediation, KCAB mediation system has several weak points. KCAB mainly deals with administrative matters related to Foreign Trade Law. Therefore, it is necessary for KCAB to come up with more improved international commercial mediation. For example, mediation should be promoted to the public as who easily rely on litigation or arbitration. Second, Setting a rule for easy access to mediation is needed by bench marking AAA's mediation guidelines and operations. Third, professional mediators should be developed by establishing relevant ADR course in law schools. This article investigated some differences of mediation system between KCAB in Korea and AAA in USA, and present some suggestions in order to promote International commercial mediation in KCAB.

• 한국조경학회지
• /
• 제48권4호
• /
• pp.8-18
• /
• 2020

본 연구는 건설산업기본법, 민사소송법 등을 적용한 대법원 판례중 조경관련 판례들을 주제별로 선별하였으며, 연도별, 소송원인에 따른 분야별 유형 그리고 소송 종류별로 나누어 조경관련 소송의 시계열적인 경향과 주요 특성을 살펴보았다. 연도별 분석결과, 조경면허가 발행되는 시기와 비슷한 1977년부터 본격적으로 소송사례들이 등장하기 시작하였다. 소송원인에 따른 유형을 계획, 시공, 관리로 나누어 분석하였으며, 그 중 '계획'이 전체 409건중 217건으로 가장 많이 조회되었다. 건설시행과정별로 다양한 판례들이 조회되었는데, 이 중 일부는 조경관련 법률적 기준이 불분명하여 발생한 사례가 조회되었다. '관리'분야에서는 안전사고 및 범죄와 같은 사례들이 조회되었는데, 해당 공간의 주된 이용객들과 법률적 정의 및 목적 등이 판단의 근거로 작용되어졌다. 사건종류별 분석결과, 조경관련 판례들은 행정사건들이 많았으며, 관리유형에서는 형사사건의 비율이 가장 높았다. 본 연구 결과는 조경 전반에 걸친 판례들을 살펴보았으며, 분야별로 유형화를 진행하였다는 점에서 일반인들도 활용할 수 있는 기초자료를 제공하였다는 것에 의의가 있다. 향후 분쟁의 저감 및 해결을 위한 법 개정 및 다양한 연구가 이뤄져야 할 것이며, 이를 위해 판례의 공개 확대가 필요하다고 판단된다.

• 의료법학
• /
• 제12권1호
• /
• pp.177-225
• /
• 2011

Verdicts related to major medical litigation given by the Seoul Central District Court, the Seoul High Court and the Supreme Court in 2010 were analyzed. It's shown that in cases of the medical negligence regarding the occurrence of neonatal cerebral palsy, the plaintiff claims were dismissed using criteria proposed by associations of Obstetrics and Gynecology and Pediatrics in US, and thereof the burden of plaintiffs to prove the medical negligence has increased. In addition, in case of that the expected survival period of infants gets longer, payments for treatment and nursing after survival period determined by judges are made and it was judged to compensate it as a periodical indemnity. In case for the explanation obligation the most frequently mentioned in the medical litigation, in addition to cases of invoking the existing theory of explanation obligation, verdicts to mention the instructions of theory regarding instruction explanation obligation and the possibility of compensation for damages on property are given. Particularly, in cases for a liability of reparation by exaggerating the effects and not disclosing the risks related to treatment with stem cells, even if the treatment not approved by Food and Drug Administration is in violation of the Pharmaceutical Affairs Law, it's not illegal as violation in Pharmaceutical Affairs Law itself. But there is a certain verdict to present the possibility of an extension of the theory of explanation obligation by acknowledging the liability of reparation caused by illegal acts with no explanations of effects and risks of treatment with stem cell by doctors and pharmaceutical companies. In an incident in which a mental patient fell and died through the opened door of the roof at the hospital, a liability of reparation was acknowledged due to defects in structure installation management and this verdict drew an attention since the overall management responsibility about patients including structures was acknowledged to the hospital besides the obligations on medical practice. In case of the verdict without giving the opportunity to state the opinion with respect to the main legal issues, the responsibility of the court was emphasized since the court did not fulfill the explanation obligations. There were some cases in which payments for nursing and caring to a patient in vegetative state during the plastic surgery was admitted. However, in dental-related incidents, the proportion of cases in which plaintiff won was low since the difficulty of proving may be reflected. In the area of administrative litigation, unlike the existing position regarding arbitrary medical charge cover collected from patients in hospital, the verdict to admit the legitimacy of collection of medical treatment was given and attracted the attention of people. Verdict in which the expression related to medical advertisement was not exaggerated disposed the original verdict and pointed out the problem of excessive regulations on medical advertisement. The effort to analyze the trend of verdicts of court through reviewing the decisions and to organize should be continued, but the full decision should be disclosed as a base, and people and systems to enable the all time monitoring should be prepared.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제21권1호
• /
• pp.57-72
• /
• 2011

According to Japanese Patent Act, the Japanese Patent Office, administrative organization, was authorized to decide validation of patent. However, Supreme Court of Japan held that a court is able to decide the invalidation of patent in 11th April, 2000, which caused the reform of Japanese Patent Act in June 2004. Reformed Patent Act established the article 104-3 and makes it for a court to decide the patentability where there are grounds for a patent invalidation. Through this amendment to the Patent Act, the legislative system to decide the patent validation has been reorganized and furthermore alleged infringer is allowed to argue against the patent validation by making use of infringement litigation procedure through defenses against patent invalidation as well as invalidation trial procedure for to file a request for a trial for patent invalidation to the Japanese Patent Office. That is to say, the article 104-3 was established in the Japanese Patent Act in the wake of Kilby, and thus a court, which is judicial authority, not administrative disposition agency is also able to decide the patent validation. Thus this article discuss how a court, the authority of which only patent infringement cases fell under, has been authorized to arbitrate cases about the patent validation and the decision of the patent validation in a court.

• 한국병원경영학회지
• /
• 제18권3호
• /
• pp.106-125
• /
• 2013

Medical litigation, as a method of resolving medical disputes, has been a huge burden on both the patient and medical institution as it is both costly and time-consuming. The Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency has created a dispute mediation process as a method of alternative dispute resolution(ADR). Being in its early stage of implementation, there are still areas requiring improvement as some functions overlap with the Korea Consumer Agency's damage redress and mediation process. This study examines the problems of existing practices in medical litigation while reviewing the mediation process of the two agencies from legal/administrative aspects, and provides an in-depth analysis of the situation through case studies and interviews. While the Korea Medical Dispute Mediation and Arbitration Agency offers many advantages in resolving medical disputes, there must be a distinct division of roles and mutual cooperation with the Korea Consumer Agency. Considering the increasing amount of compensation in medical disputes, medical professionals are being requested to carry medical malpractice insurance. However, this has yet to become a general trend in the medical field despite the growing social demand. As such, the coverage of medical malpractice insurance should be expanded to prevent medical accidents from escalating into medical disputes, thus acting as a social safety net. This study seeks to examine the methods of medical dispute resolution and to allow institutional provisions to reduce the social costs arising from such disputes.

• 한국중재학회지:중재연구
• /
• 제13권2호
• /
• pp.519-546
• /
• 2004

On June 27, 2002 Canadian Internet Registration Authority (CIRA) launched dot-ca domain name dispute resolution service through BCICAC and Resolution Canada, Inc. The Domain name Dispute Resolution Policy (CDRP) of CIRA is basically modelled after Uniform Domain Name Dispute Resolution Policy(UDRP), while the substance of CDRP is slightly modified to meet the need of Canadian domain name regime and its legal system. Firstly, this article examined CIRA's domain name dispute resolution policy in general. It is obvious that the domain name dispute resolution proceeding is non-binding arbitration to which arbitration law does not apply. However it still belongs to the arbitration and far from the usual mediation process. Domain name arbitrators render decision rather than assist disputing parties themselves reach to agreement. In this respect the domain name arbitration is similar to arbitration or litigation rather than mediation. Secondly it explored how the panels applied the substantive standards in domain name arbitration. There is some criticism that panelists interprets the test of "confusingly similar" in conflicting manner. As a result critics assert that courts' judicial review is necessary to reduce the conflicting interpretation on the test of substantive standards stipulated in paragraph 3 of CDRP. Finally, it analysed the court's position on domain name arbitral award. Canadian courts do not seem to establish a explicit standard for judicial review over it yet. However, in Black v. Molson case Ontario Superior Court applied the UDRP rules in examining the WIPO panel's decision, while US courts often apply domestic patent law and ACPA(Anticyber -squatting Consumer's Protection Act) to review domain name arbitration decision rather than UDRP rules. In conclusion this article suggests that courts should restrict their judicial review on domain name administrative panel's decision at best. This will lead to facilitating the use of ADR in domain name dispute resolution and reducing the burden of courts' dockets.