http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
류영재(Young-Jae Ryu)김보성(Bo-Seong Kim),이예현(Ye-Hyun Lee),곽승현(Seung-Hyun Kwak)서상혁(Sang-Hyeok Seo),류태범(Tae-Beum Ryu),민병찬(Byung-Chan Min) 한국산업경영시스템학회 2016 한국산업경영시스템학회지 Vol.39 No.4
The purpose of this study was to explore olfactory sensitivity of odors from injection molding processing. To do this, the experiment was carried out in an injection molding factory, and participants were exposed to the environment where odor-substances (Formaldehyde, Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylene, Styrene) exist. In addition, we used the subjective scale using semantic adjectives as an olfactory sensitivity. As a result, the assessment structure of olfactory sensitivity was composed of eight factors (irritant, thermal, tense, unique, like-dislike, active, stable, masculine), and the main factor which was irritant characteristics explained 20% of the total olfactory sensibility. These results suggested that odors from injection molding processing would cause more negative emotional responses than the flavor which is mainly used in olfactory sensitivity. This study, as a basic study of the improvement in a factory environment for the efficiency of work, has limits in that it was conducted to the extent of identifying the olfactory sensitivity structure of those who were at a laboratory and who were exposed to the environment of odor substance induced in the injection molding processing. Therefore, for the method of removing malodorous substance, the effect of materials which can neutralize it, and the comparison of a direct performance in the environment where negative sensitivity structure exists, a series of studies which aim to improve the environment of injection molding factories, such as performance assessment in the environment of a factory and an office need to be conducted. It is expected that when these studies are put together, the improvement guidelines will be provided as a type that can maximize the effectiveness of work in the factory environment where injection molding processing is done.
류영재(Young jae Ryu) 한국언론법학회 2016 언론과 법 Vol.15 No.1
대한민국 법제는 원칙적으로 ‘사실(허위사실, 허위가 아닌 사실)을 적시하여 타인의 명예를 훼손하는 행위’를 형사처벌하며 예외적으로 그 명예훼손 행위가 공공의 이익에 관한 것일 경우 처벌을 면책하고 있다. 이러한 규범체제는 공인이나 공적 사안에 대한 보도와 의혹제기를 형사처벌 대상으로 삼아 언론의 자유를 심각하게 제한하고, 자기지배 원칙에 따라‘검증을 통한 올바른 평가’를 기반으로 하는 민주주의 기본질서를 허물 위험을 가진다. 대한민국헌법 제21조 제4항, 제37조 제2항에 근거하여 표현의 자유가 타인의 명예를 보호하기 위하여 법률로써 제한될 수 있다고 하더라도, 그 제한의 정도가 민주주의 기본질서로 기능하는 표현의 자유를 실질적으로 형해화하는 수준에 이른다면, 이는 헌법을 위반한 제한이 된다. 본 연구는 판례 검토를 중심으로 현재 대한민국 재판 실무상 사법부가 명예훼손 법리를 어떻게 해석하여 형사처벌을 기준을 세우고 있는지 각 구성요건요소 및 위법성 조각사유별로 분석해보았다. 검토 결과 각 요소별 법률해석 기준에는 무리가 없는데 그 각 요소가 결합할 경우 언론의 자유가 심각하게 제한되어 헌법위반의 위험이 발생할 수 있음을 확인하였다. 결론으로는 사실 적시 명예훼손 처벌 규범이 합헌인 현실 아래에서 사법부가 명예훼손규범을 헌법합치적으로 해석하기 위한 어려움이 산재해 있음을 인정하고, 언론자유의 본질적 기능을 훼손하지 않는 규범해석기준을 대안으로 제시하였다. Korea law criminally punishes as a rule the act of stating truth (a statement that is not false) or false and thereby hurting another’s reputation but exempts the act if it is for public interest. Such system gravely suppress freedom of the press because it criminally punishes the act of reporting on and questioning on public figures and public issues, and has the danger of destroying the basic democratic order based upon “evaluation through demonstration” according to the principle of autonomy. Even if the freedom of the press can be restricted by statute to protect others’ reputation pursuant to Articles 21(4), 37(2) of the Constitution, the degree of restriction should not reach a level effectively distorting the freedom of speech functioning as a basic democratic order. This research is analysis of the court precedents into the issues of how the Korean judicial practice interprets the principles of defamation and sets up a penal standard for each of the elements and defenses. The analysis shows that, although judicial interpretation on each element is without fault, the interpretations of several elements, put together, restrict freedom of the press so seriously as to cause the risk of unconstitutionality. In conclusion, the author acknowledges that, as long as the truth defamation law remains constitutional, the Korean judiciary faces a difficult job of finding a ‘constitution-conforming interpretation’ of the law, and proposes a standard that does not infringe the fundamental principle of freedom of the press.