스포츠 방송 중계영상과 저작권

이봉림(Bong-Rim Lee) 한국비교사법학회 2009 比較私法 Vol.16 No.4

Regarding the relay broadcasting in sport, a key point can be said to be whether the sports game itself can be protected copyright and whether the sports relay video can be protected copyright. In light of our country's copyright law, the requirements for works are being taken what there should be creativity and what expressed a human being's thought or emotion. “Fixation on tangible media of expression” is not taken requirement. Thus, the sports relay video will need to be evaluated as the audiovisual works. Also, in case of audiovisual works, a special case exists. Thus, the relay video in sports game is seen to be proper for being evaluated as audiovisual works. Furthermore, a conflict is being amplified these days between terrestrial broadcasting and some of relay-right selling businesses by using social conflict of the sports relay broadcasting rights. The demand increases from terrestrial monopoly to multi-channel platform. Thus, there is necessity for establishing an effective measure for a rapid rise in price of popular sport. Also, like a famous entertainer, even the names and portraits of famous sports players themselves are thought to have economic profit or value. Accordingly, the discussion about definite provisions pertinent to this is considered to be imminent.

4차 산업혁명시대 노동환경의 변화에 따른 법정책적 연구

이봉림(Lee, Bong-Rim) 한국법학회 2022 법학연구 Vol.87 No.-

4차 산업혁명의 시대에 이르러 인공지능은 우리 사회의 전 영역에 침투해 갈 것이다. 여기에서 기본권 영역도 예외는 아니라 할 것이다. 이세돌과 알파고의 대국에서 목격한 것처럼 인공지능의 잠재성과 발전 속도는 인간의 예상을 뛰어넘고 있다. 바둑에서 인간이 인공지능에 패배할 것이라고는 아무도 예측하지 못하였던 것과 같이 법조계에서도 같은 현상이 발생할 가능성은 충분하다. 기본소득은 자산심사나 노동조건이 없이 개인을 단위로 하여 모든 사람에게 무조건적으로 이행되는 정기적인 현금지급을 의미한다. 이에 일회성 급여가 아닌 정기성, 현물급여가 아닌 현금지급성, 가구단위가 아닌 개별성, 자산에 대한 심사가 없는 보편성, 노동이나 노동의향의 입증을 요구하지 않는 무조건성을 특징으로 한다. 4차 산업혁명을 맞아 기본소득에 대한 논의가 우리 사회에서 생명력을 얻고 생산적인 방향으로 흐르기 위해서는 기본소득 개념에 대한 유연한 태도가 요구된다. 특히 실천적 측면에서 완전한 기본소득의 도입으로 가기 위한 과도기적 수단으로서 참가소득이나 기한제한과 같은 이행기적 전략에 대한 진지하고 구체적인 논의가 병행되어야 함은 당연한 이야기가 될 것이다. By the time of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, artificial intelligence will penetrate into all areas of our society. It is not an exception in the Fundamental rights of the area. As we have witnessed in the match between Lee Sedol and AlphaGo, the potential and evolution of artificial intelligence have surpassed human expectations. It is possible that the same phenomenon is likely to occur in the legal system, as nobody predicted that man would lose artificial intelligence in Baduk. Basic income is a periodic cash payment unconditionally delivered to all on an individual basis, without means-test or work requirement. That is, basic income has the following five characteristics: Periodic, Cash payment, Individual, Universal, Unconditional. In the wake of the 4th Industrial Revolution, it can be said that in order for discussions on basic income to gain vitality in our society and flow in a productive direction, a flexible attitude toward the concept of basic income is required. In particular, it is natural that serious and concrete discussions on transitional strategies such as participation income and deadline limitations should be held as a transitional means to go to the introduction of full basic income in practical terms.

인격권으로서의 프라이버시권과 퍼블리시티권의 법리고찰

이봉림(Lee, Bong-Rim) 원광대학교 법학연구소 2008 圓光法學 Vol.24 No.3

Basically, the right of privacy means passive and defensive concepts in a sense that it aims to secure ‘secrecy and freedom of privacy' as stipulated in the Article 17 of Korean Constitution, but it has lately involved more active implications that include legitimate control over personal information and independent decision of behaviors. In further sense, it is constitutionally accepted that the right of privacy widely encompasses ‘personal interests deserving social protection from their unwanted disclosure and independent interests pertinent to making crucial decision, including personal right of marriage, childbirth, contraception and child nurture.’ On the other hand, the right of publicity means protection of personal name, portrait(image) and the like from their unauthorized use in favor of others' interests. Thus, it encompasses both the right of personality and that of property fundamentally. From this perspective, the right of publicity may be considered a sort of property right with different nature from the right of personality. However, it is undeniable that the right of publicity considers elements of personality right as the object of right, so it is possibly reasonable to consider the right of publicity as the right which may be restricted according to the principle of good faith from the perspectives of the detailed content of agreement, rather than compose it as genuine right of property. In Korea, the National Assembly Culture & Tourism Council discussed legislation of express provisions about the right of publicity on June 23, 2005, but came to nothing worthwhile. In latest situation of even slight but gradually increasing legal disputes about the right of publicity, it will be required to prepare corresponding legislative solutions sooner or later.

나홀로 소송에 관한 각국의 입법례 검토 - 프로보노 제도를 중심으로 -

이봉림(Bong Rim Lee) 원광대학교 법학연구소 2018 圓光法學 Vol.34 No.2

The increase in lawsuits is a remarkable phenomenon in Korea, and it is time to study it. However, there are not many papers that have been studied in earnest. Therefore, it would be beneficial to study other countries where research on litigation is active and is being implemented in various ways. It is also an unfamiliar concept to us, but the consideration of the pro bono activity called the so-called public interest law movement is very important to us. The reason the people are suing alone is that they can not afford to pay the first lawyer s fee. Second, there are cases where lawsuits are more appropriate due to the nature of the case. Finally, Do-it-Myself. Therefore, our judiciary should provide information on actual lawsuits and various reference materials for the parties to the lawsuit, and introduce the helpers in complex cases. In the case of a case or a case in which a lawsuit is carried out by the intention of the applicant, it is necessary to simplify various forms, refine legal terms, and provide relevant information to the parties involved. In addition, it is necessary to study how to strengthen the jurisdiction of the people by eliminating unnecessary obstacles by examining whether procedures or systems are difficult to sue alone. 나홀로 소송의 증가는 우리나라의 주목할 만한 현상으로서 이에 관한 연구가 필요한 시점이다. 하지만 이에 대하여 본격적으로 연구한 논문은 별로 없는 실정이다. 따라서 나홀로 소송에 관한 연구가 활발하고 여러 방법으로 시행되고 있는 다른 국가의 경우를 연구하는 것은 유익할 것이다. 또한 우리에게는 낯선 개념이지만 이른바 공익법 운동이라는 프로보노 활동에 대한 고찰은 우리에게 시사하는 바가 크다. 국민이 나홀로 소송을 하는 이유는 첫째 변호사 비용을 지불할 경제적인 여유가 없다는 것이고, 둘째 사건의 성질상 나홀로 소송이 오히려 적당한 경우가 있으며, 마지막으로 변호사 비용을 지불하지 아니하고 스스 로 소송을 진행하겠다는 Do-it-Myself(DIY) 현상이 늘어났기 때문이다. 이에 우리 사법부는 나홀로 소송의 당사자를 위하여 실제 소송의 정보와 다양한 참고자료를 제공하고, 복잡한 사건의 경우 조력자를 소개해 주는 등의 역할을 해야 할 것이다. 사건의 성질이나 본인의 의사에 의하여 나홀로 소송을 수행하는 경우에는 이로 인한 어려움을 완화할 수 있도록 각종 서식을 간이화하고, 법률용어를 순화시키고, 본인소송 당사자에게 관련 정보를 제공할 필요가 있을 것이다. 또한 절차나 제도가 나홀로 소송에 어려움은 없는지 살펴서 불필요한 장애를 제거하도록 하여 국민의 사법권 강화를 위한 방법을 연구해야 할 것이다.

분묘기지권에 관한 또 하나의 고찰

이봉림(Lee Bong-Rim) 한국사법행정학회 2021 사법행정 Vol.62 No.12

법률비용보험의 국내시장 활성화 방안에 관한 연구

이봉림(Lee Bong Rim) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2008 성균관법학 Vol.20 No.2

  The current Legal Expense Insurances(LEIs) of the world can be categorized into two types. One is the insurance of the commerce type which insurance companies make as one of the insurance product. This regards the situation which a legal service is required as an insurance accident and pays the fee of the legal service provided as a insurance payment. The other is the mutual aid type which makes funds for a prospective legal service and, with the funds, provides a legal service directly or pays the fee of it.<BR>  Korea is in urgent need of the introduction of LEI since the legal service market has been distorted mainly due to the lawyers" improper prestige, highly expensive lawyers" fee and the lack of understanding of legal dispute resolution process. In these reasons, several internet legal companies entered the stage of market recently. As these companies considered the legal counselling and LEI as profitable items, they developed LEI products co-working with domestic property insurance companies. In spite of close examination to introduce LEI, a number of facts prevented it to be successful. First, different from the other insurances, LEI guarantees expenses of highly specialized services. Second, the lawyers" fee is unreasonably high. Third, the character of "the problem of the adverse selection" is quite different from that of the other insurances. Finally, it is difficult to calculate the scale of legal service market with existing statistic records.<BR>  Recently, Financial Supervisory Service announced that domestic cyber-law firm will launch a new insurance item sooner or later. In this paper, I checked the present condition of the domestic legal market, all circumstances for and the effects of successful importation, and made a remark about some points to be improved.<BR>  Considering that the number of legal disputes including nonlitigation cases is almost 16 millions, market for LEI is fully matured and LEI will be the primary item of the insurance against loss without doubt. In addition, LEI should take root because it has public benefits to help the realization of social justice.

윤창호법 위헌 관련 여러 시각과 남은 과제

이봉림(Lee, Bong-Rim) 한국법학회 2023 법학연구 Vol.89 No.-

음주운전으로 인한 사고의 증가와 2018년 9월에 벌어진 윤창호 씨 사건 등의 영향으로 음주운전에 대한 전반적인 사회적 분위기가 처벌수위를 강화해야 한다는 방향으로 치우치게 되었다. 이를 반영하여 국회에서 위험운전치사상죄의 법정형을 상향조정하는 특정범죄가중법 개정이 2018년 12월 18일 이루어져 같은 날 시행되었는데, 이에 대해 헌법재판소에서는 2021년 11월 25일과 2022년 5월 26일 두 차례 위헌결정을 내렸다. 음주운전은 과실이 아닌 고의범죄이므로 이를 전범과 후범의 10년이라는 기한 제한을 둬야 한다는 이번 헌법재판소의 판단이 형법에서 말하는 책임원칙에 반한다고 할 수는 없을 것이다. 다만 본고에서 주안점을 둔 것은 헌법재판소의 판단이 잘못되었다는 것의 측면이 아닌 이번 법률개정이 여론이나 민심을 충실히 반영한 시의성 있는 입법이라는 성과의 이면에는 입법의 원리나 비판적 의견 등에 대한 충분한 검토가 이루어지지 않은 채 입법되었다는 비판적 시각도 존재한다는 점이다. 특정 법률이 위헌결정을 받게 되면, 입법적 보완이 이루어질 때까지 처벌근거가 사라지는 등 법적 공백이 발생할 뿐만 아니라 법질서의 안정성이 침해되는 등 여러 형태의 문제가 초래될 수 있다는 것은 자명한 사실이다. 그러므로 이번 헌법재판소 결정을 적시성을 확보하면서도 헌법 적합성이나 법체계 정당성을 충실히 검토할 수 있는 입법 과정에 대한 고민과 동시에 윤창호법의 입법정신을 다시 한 번 생각해보는 계기로 비판적인 시각에서 바라보는 것도 필요하다고 생각한다. Due to the increase in accidents caused by drunk driving and the incident of Yoon Chang-ho in September 2018, the overall social atmosphere of drunk driving has shifted toward strengthening the level of punishment. Reflecting this, the National Assembly revised the Specific Crime Weighted Law, which raises the statutory form of dangerous driving offenses, on December 18, 2018, and took effect on the same day. In response, the Constitutional Court ruled twice unconstitutional on November 25, 2021 and May 26, 2022. Since drunk driving is a deliberate crime, not an error, it can not be said that the judgment of the Constitutional Court that it should limit the period of 10 years for war criminals and criminals is contrary to the principle of responsibility in the criminal law. However, the main point of this article is not that the judgment of the Constitutional Court is wrong, but that the amendment of the law is a timely legislation that faithfully reflects public opinion and public opinion. There is also a critical view that it has been legislated without sufficient review. If a particular law is found to be unconstitutional, it is self-evident that there will be legal gaps such as the disappearance of the grounds for punishment until legislative supplementation is made, as well as various types of problems such as infringement of the stability of the law and order. Therefore, it is necessary to look at the Constitutional Court decision from a critical point of view as an opportunity to think about the legislative process that can faithfully examine the constitutional suitability and legitimacy of the legal system while securing the timeliness.

人格權에 關한 各國의 立法例 檢討

이봉림(Lee Bong Rim) 성균관대학교 비교법연구소 2008 성균관법학 Vol.20 No.1

We value our own nature intrinsically, and possess so-called interests or rights to free expressions of ourselves. The interests may come from relationships with others, or may remain only in our own sphere. It is personal rights that protect our interests. However, our civil law still fails to make positive provisions on personal rights, but abides by passive standpoints that violation of personal rights means a tort that meets basic requirements for justifying a claim for damages. In addition, with regard to general concepts on personal rights, majority opinions and judicial precedents in Korea consider Article 751 and 752 of Korean Civil Code just as cautionary and exemplary provisions for Article 750 of said Code. In the wake of examining the legislative examples in foreign countries on the rights of the personality, what is secured as the general right could be known to be the Declaration of the Rights of Man approved by the National Assembly of France in 1789. Following its spirit, the thought of human dignity is being realized by which the provision of elucidation is put even in Article 12 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which was adopted at the United Nations General Assembly on December 10, 1948. There is no specified provision on the rights of the personality in France. However, it is the real situation of being still protected by the stipulation with saying that “each person has a right of the respect for its privacy” in Article 9 for the French civil law and by being stipulated in Article 16 of the civil law by the Law on Bioethics and Biosafety. The ground of the positive law, which was approved on the general rights of the personality in Germany is starting from being prescribed ‘the declaration on the dignity of man’ in Article I, Chapter I and ‘the manifestation on free personality’ in Clause I, Article II for the German constitutional law (fundamental law). And, the enactment as the general rights of the personality can be raised to be Article 704 (currently Article 823). Meanwhile, in case of America, it is being addressed by being divided into the right of privacy, which is the moral benefit, and the right of the publicity, which is the property profit. In case of Switzerland, it is composed of two laws such as Zivilgesetzbuch in 1907 and Obligationerecht in 1911, and the enforcement of the law began from January 1, 1912. Unlike the German civil law and the French civil law, the Swiss civil law is approving the general rights of the personality as one of the private rights. In the meantime, Japan had ever been discussed the American right of privacy from the 1920s after being translated into the right of the secrecy or the right of the secret, but it was quite negative. And, an opportunity, which came to cause a big concern, starts from after a case of “宴の あと.” Regarding a legal method, the rights of life, the body, freedom, and pursuit of happiness in Article 13 of the constitutional law were being seen as the provision of the ground for the individual rights of the personality. However, the infringement on the rights of the personality started to be recognized as the illegal act, by introducing theories of Germany and America since then. The civil law of Japan is regarding this as illegal act given the infringement on absolute right called the right of the personality. Either a leading case or a doctrine sees this as illegal act when the act of infringing on benefit, which has value enough to be protected even if there is no violation on a right, is unlawful, and is addressing it as an issue of illegality. As for a method of relief given the infringement on the right of the personality, a right of claim for damages, and a right of claim for prohibition as a means of restitution, are being acknowledged. In contrast to this, our country is being revealed demerits in each e

대리모계약의 유효성 여부와 입법논의를 위한 제요소 연구

이봉림(Lee, Bong-Rim) 원광대학교 법학연구소 2012 圓光法學 Vol.28 No.4

대리모계약에 대한 유효성, 무효성의 논쟁은 이미 구미 제국에서는 입법적으로 해결하고 있는 나라도 있다. 우리 현행법하에서 대리모계약은 무효인가 혹은 유효인가 이에 관하여 아직까지는 열띤 논쟁이 없었고 이에 관한 학설이나 대법원의 판례도 없지만 우리나라 학자들의 지배적인 견해는 대리모계약의 효력을 부인하고 있다. 또한 세계 각국의 입법례를 통해볼 때 역시 대리모를 부인하고 있음을 알 수 있다. 그러나 우리나라는 입법적인 대책이 전혀 없는 실정이다. 그 어느 나라보다도 자에 대한 욕구가 강한 만족임을 생각할 때에 이는 상당히 심각한 문제가 아닐 수 없다. 그러나 대리모계약을 규제할 수 있는 법률이 존재하지 않는 등 기타 이유로 우리나라도 이 계약이 음성적으로 이루어지고 있으며 앞으로 법적 논쟁이 심화되어질 가능성이 예견된다. 따라서 대리모 문제를 규율하기 위한 입법이 시급히 요청이 되며, 그러한 입법이 제정됨에 있어서 고려되어야 할 몇 가지 요소에 대해 언급하고자 한다. 첫째, 대리모와 의뢰부부의 자격요건의 제한이 필요하다. 둘째, 대리모계약의 체결방식에 대한 가이드 라인이 제시되어야만 한다. 셋째, 출생자의 법적 지위가 직접 규정되어야만 한다. 마지막으로 고도의 인격적 성격을 지니는 계약임을 고려하여 해지가능성에 대한 허용 여부를 검토해야만 할 것이다. There are already some European countries which are legislatively solving the arguments about validity or invalidity of the surrogate mother contract. Not yet in Korea have there been some serious discussions to see if the surrogate mother contract is valid or invalid under the present law systems. Also there have been little accommodated some clear scientific theory or judicial precedents about the issue. Nevertheless, the dominant view of Korean scholars seem that the surrogate mother contract is invalid. In addition, the majority of the legislation examples in various nations recognizes the invalidity of the surrogate mother. The problem is that Korea has no legislative measure against the issue. This can cause some serious problems when considering that Koreans have stronger needs for their descendents than people of any other countries. Partly because of no laws regulating the surrogate mother contract and partly because of some other reasons, the contracts are being implemented secretly in Korea, making the legal augments more serious in future. Therefore urgent request for legislation to regulate surrogate mother issues and Would like to mention on several factors that should be considered in such a law as enacted. First, surrogate mother and commissioned a couple of qualifications are needed. Second, the guidelines about how surrogate mother contract signed must be presented. Third, the legal status of persons born in direct policies should be. Finally, the highly personal nature of the contract that We will have to examine whether or not to allow for the possibility of termination.

코로나19로 인한 팬데믹 상황에서 권력기관의 역할

이봉림(Lee, Bong Rim),김명수(Kim, Myoung Su) 한국법학회 2021 법학연구 Vol.84 No.-

‘코로나 19’로 인하여 사람들의 생활방식이 바뀌고 이에 따라 의식도 변화하고 있다. 이번 감염병 사태는 자연 앞에서 인간이 얼마나 나약한 존재인지를 보여주었고, 이런 상황에서 인간이 어떻게 현명하게 대처해야 하는지 숙제도 던져주고 있다. ‘코로나 19’ 사태로 국내에서도 방역 효율성과 기본권이 충돌하는 경우가 잇따랐다. 구체적으로 보면 개인 신상정보 노출 우려와 국민의 알 권리, 종교의 자유, 집회의 자유 등의 기본권 제한이 행해졌다. 코로나 팬더믹 상황에서 국회는 법률의 재·개정, 수 차례의 추경안을 심의하고 의결하였으며 질병관리본부를 질병관리청으로 승격시키는 역할을 수행하였다. 정부 또한 감염병예방법을 개정하여 감염자를 격리하며 집합금지명령을 통하여 감염병의 확산 방지와 밀접 접촉을 막기 위해 거리두기를 시행하였다. 이로 인하여 어려움을 겪고 있는 국민들의 소득과 생계에 도움을 주기 위해 재난지원금을 지급하고 있다. 사법부 역시 기본권이 침해받은 국민들이 존재하고, 법원은 기본권을 침해당한 국민이 제기한 소송을 담당해 국민의 기본권을 보호하기 위한 재판권을 행사할 역할을 행사하였다. 이를 민주적으로 통제하기 위해서는 자연 재난이나 감염병과 관련한 법제도의 정비와 행정권의 남용과 견제 장치 그리고 국회나 다른 국가기관의 역할에 대한 고민이 필요하다. 기본권 침해에 대한 헌법재판의 활성화가 필요하다. 기본권 제한이 큰 법률에 대해서는 위헌법률심판으로 행정권의 남용에 대해서는 적극적인 헌법소원심판을 통하여 민주적인 권력분립의 원칙 실현에 힘써야 할 것이다. Because of Corona 19, peoples lifestyles are changing and consciousness is changing accordingly. The outbreak of infectious diseases has shown how weak humans are in front of nature, and in this situation, it is also giving homework on how humans should cope wisely. Due to the Corona 19 crisis, quarantine efficiency and basic rights have also clashed in Korea. Specifically, restrictions on basic rights such as concerns over the exposure of personal personal information, the right of the people to know, freedom of religion, and freedom of assembly were imposed. To control this democratically, it is necessary to think about the maintenance of the legal system related to natural disasters or infectious diseases, abuse of administrative power and check mechanisms, and the role of the National Assembly or other state agencies. The revitalization of the Constitutional Court on infringement of fundamental rights is necessary. For laws with large fundamental rights restrictions, the government should strive to realize the principle of democratic separation of power through an active constitutional petition trial against the abuse of administrative power as an unconstitutional law trial.