혜정 (蕙庭) 차복재교수 정년퇴임기념 : 도시의 매력증강론에 있어서 Amenity minimum 에 관한 고찰 : 경주시를 중심으로

김일룡 대한관광경영학회 1992 觀光硏究 Vol.2 No.-

新しいりゾ一ト空間の開發·整備方案に關する硏究

金一龍 서라벌대학 1993 논문집 Vol.7 No.-

Resort development is conducted for region promotion-it accelerates economic and social benefit of an area. But in the course of it, we have not only merits which activate the region, but also disadvantages. For example, natural envirnoment and tourism resources may be destroyed by unreasonable development or suddenly the prices and the land value can go up. And the popularization caused by the increase of tourists can make our life codition worse. Resort projector should consider the convinences of the redidents the first priority. So I would like to give you the following proposals of the developement and maintenence scheme 1. Resort development plan established with long period. 2. Resort for the people. 3. Resort for the inhabitant region. 4. Resort for the new country formation. 5. Resort with locality, originality and hospitality. I think that the attrative resort region maintainence scheme depends on how to maximize the 5 factors like the aboves.

慶州市の空間的特性診斷及び觀光振興の對策に關する硏究

김일룡 慶州專門大學 1996 慶州專門大學 論文集 Vol.10 No.-

地域經營としての觀光振興·促進の改善方向と代案

김일룡 慶州專門大學 1995 慶州專門大學 論文集 Vol.9 No.-

地域振興における觀光地診斷·分析方案に關する硏究

김일룡 慶州專門大學 1994 慶州專門大學 論文集 Vol.8 No.-

유전자변형 면화 MON757, MON88702, COT67B, GHB811의 동시검출법 개발

김일룡,설민아,윤아미,이중로,최원균 한국환경생물학회 2021 환경생물 : 환경생물학회지 Vol.39 No.4

면화는 중요한 섬유 작물로 종자는 가축의 사료로 사용 된다. 작물 생명공학은 농업 분야에서 농업적 형질과 질을 향상시키기 위해 활용되어져 왔다. 국내 식품, 사료, 가 공 제품에 유전자변형 (LM) 면화의 사용이 증가함에 따라 환경으로의 LM 면화의 비의도적 유출 또한 증가하고 있다. LMO 모니터링 사업에서 수집된 LM 면화를 검정하기 위하여 국내 수입 승인된 LM 면화의 검출법 개발이 필요하다. 본 연구에서는 LM 면화 MON757, MON88792, COT67B, GHB811 4종을 대상으로 동시검출법을 개발하였다. 이벤트에 대한 유전 정보는 유럽 JRC와 농림축산검역본부에서 확보하였다. LM 면화의 동시검출법 개발을 위해 이벤트 특 이적인 프라이머를 설계하였으며 특이적인 증폭을 확인하였다. 특이도 검정, 무작위 표준물질 혼합물 분석, 검출한계 분석을 통하여 동시검출법의 정확도와 특이도를 검증하였다. 그 결과 본 동시검출법은 각각의 이벤트를 검출할 수 있으며 LM 표준물질을 활용하여 특이도를 검정하였다. 또한 무작위 표준물질 조합도 정확하게 검출할 수 있다. 검출한 계 분석에서는 25 ng의 미량의 주형 DNA로 단회 분석으로 검출이 가능하다. 결론적으로 4종의 LM 면화 동시검출법을 개발하였으며 LM 면화 자생체 분석에 활용될 것으로 사료 된다. Cotton is an important fiber crop, and its seeds are used as feed for dairy cattle. Crop biotechnology has been used to improve agronomic traits and quality in the agricultural industry. The frequent unintentional release of LM cotton into the environment in South Korea is attributed to the increased application of living modified (LM) cotton in food, feed, and processing industries. To identify and monitor the LM cotton, a method for detecting the approved LM cotton in South Korea is required. In this study, we developed a method for the simultaneous detection of four LM cotton varieties, MON757, MON88702, COT67B, and GHB811. The genetic information of each LM event was obtained from the European Commission-Joint Research Centre and Animal and Plant Quarantine Agency. We designed event-specific primers to develop a multiplex PCR method for LM cotton and confirmed the specific amplification. Using specificity assay, random reference material (RM) mixture analysis and limit of detection (LOD), we verified the accuracy and specificity of the multiplex PCR method. Our results demonstrate that the method enabled the detection of each event and validation of the specificity using other LM RMs. The efficiency of multiplex PCR was further verified using a random RM mixture. Based on the LOD, the method identified 25 ng of template DNA in a single reaction. In summary, we developed a multiplex PCR method for simultaneous detection of four LM cotton varieties, for possible application in LM volunteer analysis.

관련성이론의 개요와 그 적용영역

김일룡 한국민사소송법학회 2012 민사소송 Vol.16 No.1

The Relevancy theory was developed under Anglo–American legal system when it was enacted and became part of the Federal Rules of Evidence,but the need to introduce this theory in Korean judicial procedure is required in order to realize the objectives of reasonable, fair, prompt, and economic civil procedure system, to give order between rules with the theory. The fields that can develop de lege ferenda of interpretation theory by introducing the relevancy theory to Korean legal system are as below. First of all, through relevancy theory, one can stereotype individual regulation of evidence ejection with natural relevance and legal relevance;one can also understand necessity clauses of Civil Procedure Code article 290 as individual evidence ejectment clause; and at the same time, it can reach intramarginal limitations by limiting the scope of evidence that can be ejected. These operations allow a ground to clearly specify reasons of evidence ejectment on the decisions or protocols for hearing to substantially secure the objections on the evidence ejectment beyond intramarginal limitations. Second, when the adversary defends the authentication of documentary evidence through ignorance or denial, one can only converse the burden of proof by using the presumption of authentication clause under current Korean legal system when all ‘ignorance’ allegations cannot be solve through the burden of proof conversion. We need to codify the types of “self–authenticated” evidences as rule 902 of Federal Rules of Evidence defines;otherwise the court should cleary specify in the decide when eliminating admissions with binding force on authentication is an important foundation for fact–finding. Third, as for expert opinions of scientific or technical evidences, even under the circumstances when the authentication of identification are acknowledged, a separate procedure to probe its reliability is needed. The procedure is needed because even judges tend th label “errorless” on the expert opinions of evidences with the word ‘scientific’ or ‘technical’. Understanding these phenomena as substantial probative force of evidence under principle of free evaluation of proof, there is no way to prevent fact–finding through scientific or technical evidence from being distorted. Under Korean legal system, absence of clause like the rule 702 of Federal Rules of Evidence, exclusion of evidence should be allowed for scientific or technical evidences have possibilities to mislead or confuse facts. Lastly, the article 23 of the Civil Conciliation Act, which forbids quotations of the parties of a conciliation and the statements of the parties interested when the conciliation fails, indicates that the statements cannot be used as a confession or an evidence when they are submitted again in the latter judicial procedure. The article should be understood that the statements of the adversary party cannot only be accepted as preceding confession but also the parties cannot be interrogated in the examination form with the statement made during the conciliation. Such manner coincides with the rule 408 of Federal Rules of Evidence which excludes those statements for law relevance. Therefore, the conciliation reports should be very simple with the least information like the appearance but without any specific information;and statements of the both parties at the conciliation should not be reported and these statements cannot be added to the merit reports. Also the clause that directs the court which failed to manage the immediately directed conciliation to lead the merit should be deleted from the Civil Conciliation Act since the judge panel already knows about the facts from the conciliation which puts the limitation of the quoting preceding statements in the Civil Conciliation Act out of action and since the ‘Ruling of Recommendation of Compromise’ system was recently adopted in the Civil Procedure Code.

도시관광의 매력 - 신 京都 역 빌딩을 중심으로 -

김일룡,이봉석,임경환,최석규 경주지역발전협의회 부설 경주발전연구원 2001 경주연구 Vol.10 No.-

공동소송적 보조참가인의 소송법상 지위에 관한 고찰

김일룡 서울시립대학교 서울시립대학교 법학연구소 2016 서울법학 Vol.24 No.1

In discussing the legal procedural position of Supplementary Intervenor alike of Co-Litigation, should the intervention as supplementary intervenor alike be allowed, legal procedural position is considered to be equal because of the effect of judgment to all intervenors according to common view. But the specific type of the judgment effect to the third party is very diverse and thus when discussing the position equally in a single frame as the Supplementary Intervenor alike of Co-Litigation, the benefits different by each intervenor is inevitably neglected. Even in case of excluding other types here, in parallel litigation in which the benefit of the intervenor and the intervened is in sharp conflict, particularly it's necessary to allow the obligor to intervene co-litigation in case of Obligee’suit of Subrogation to Obligor with the company in Representative Suits by Shareholders by granting the legal standing to sue. It's already grant to Representative Suits by Shareholders, but not in Obligee’suit of Subrogation to Obligor and consequently, obligor has no proper way to keep in check and protect its interest in case of nonsuit by Obligee or infringement on benefit of obligor. In Japan, legislation aloowing the intervention by obligor in a way of Intervention into Co-Litigation is in process. Should such measure be difficult to adopt, it's necessary, as the second best alternative, to interpret in a way to accept the need of the consent by Supplementary Intervenor alike of Co-Litigation or in a way not to apply the restriction of appeal to the obligor intervened into the litigation by incorporating the real interests of litigation type, breaking from the formal standpoint that supplementary intervention into co-litigation is equivalent to Indispensable Co-Litigation. In addition, compulsory admission under litigation state according to the proviso to Article 76-1 of the Civil Procedure Act shall be excluded so as to allow the Obligor to protect its interest. 공동소송적 보조참가인의 지위를 논함에 있어 통설적 견해는, 일단 참가인에게 재판의 효력이 미쳐 공동소송적 보조참가인으로 참가하는 것이 허용되면 그 소송상 지위는 모두 동일하다고 본다. 그러나 재판의 효력이 제3자에게 미치는 경우의 구체적인 유형은 매우 다양하다. 따라서 다양한 유형의 참가인을 공동소송적 보조참가인이라는 하나의 틀로 묶어 일률적으로 그 지위를 논하게 되면, 각 참가인이 가지는 상이한 이익 상황이 도외시되는 문제점이 있다. 통설은 채권자대위소송에 있어서의 채무자가 채권자대위소송에 참가하면 그 채무자는 공동소송적 보조참가인이라고 본다. 그러나 참가인의 이익과 피참가인의 이익이 첨예하게 대립하는 병행형 소송담당의 경우에는 당사자적격을 인정함으로써 공동소송참가를 허용할 필요가 있다. 주주대표소송 중 회사의 참가 또는 채권자대위소송 중 다른 채권자의 참가의 경우 판례는 이미 공동소송참가를 인정하고 있으나, 채권자대위소송의 채무자에게는 이를 인정하지 아니함으로써 대위채권자가 항소심 소송 계속 중 소를 취하하거나 제3채무자와 짜고 채무자의 이익을 침해하더라도 채무자는 이를 견제하고 자신의 이익을 보호할 마땅한 방법이 없는 실정이기 때문이다. 만약 위의 방안을 채택하기 어렵다면 차선책으로서 공동소송적 보조참가가 유사필수적 공동소송에 준한다는 형식적인 관점에서 벗어나 소송유형의 실질적인 이해관계를 반영하여 적어도 대위채권자의 소의 취하에 공동소송적 보조참가인의 동의가 필요한 것으로 해석하거나 소송에 참가한 채무자에게 재소금지의 제재를 부과하지 않는 방향으로 해석할 필요가 있다. 아울러 이러한 경우에는 민사소송법 제76조 제1항 단서의 소송상태 승인의무도 배제함으로써 채무자로 하여금 자신의 이익을 보호할 수 있도록 하여야 할 것이다.

도시관광의 활성화 방안 - 타이의 방콕, 파타야 거리풍경을 둘러본 후 -

김일룡 경주지역발전협의회 부설 경주발전연구원 1999 경주연구 Vol.8 No.-