http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
이항복 건국대학교 국어국문학과 1986 中原語文學 Vol.2.3 No.-
필자의 견해로는 '흙의 의미를 깊이 깨달은 작가로는 무영이 미증유의 작가라고 말해도 지나치지 않을'만큼 그는 우리나라 '농민문학의 선구자'이며 아직도 그의 작품을 능가하는 농민소설이 나오지 않고 있는 실정으로 본고에서 농민을 대상으로 작품의 구조를 철저히 분석하여 이 소설이 농민 소설로서 거둔 성과와 더 나아가 부분적이나마 1950년대 농민 소설의 특징을 살펴보고자 한다.
WTO 반덤핑협정과 중국반덤핑 법에 관한 비교와 대 중국 협상활용 방안
이항복 한국협상학회 2003 협상연구 Vol.9 No.1
미국, 유럽 및 일본 등은 WTO 다자체제를 보완하고 13억 시장을 제도권으로 유입하기 위하여 중국을 WTO에 가입시키고자 노력하였고, 그 결과 2001년 카타르 도하에서 개최된 제4차 WTO 각료회의에서 전체회원국의 2/3의 찬성으로 중국의 WTO 가입이 성사되었다. 이런 중국의 WTO 체제하로의 편입은 중국이 WTO규정에 따라서 무역구제수단을 이용할 수 있는 계기를 제공하였고, 중국은 이를 적극적으로 활용하고 있는 실정이다. 특히 중국은 반덤핑제도의 이용을 선호하고 있고, 특히 한국기업들에 대한 반덤핑조사를 활발하게 하고 있다. 반덤핑제도는 불공정무역에 대해 가장 널리 활용되고 있는 국제적인 무역구제(trade remedy)수단이다. 그러나 이 무역구제의 수단으로서의 반덤핑제도는 자국의 국내산업을 보호하려는 보호무역주의의 가장 유효한 수단으로 또한 널리 알려져 있다. 반덤핑제도가 국내산업의 보호를 위해 남용 될 수 있는 가장 큰 이유는 물론 현행 반덤핑협정이 명료하지 못하다는 점도 있지만, 더 근본적인 문제는 WTO 회원국들이 WTO 반덤핑협정의 국내이행을 위해 제정한 각각의 반덤핑법과 제도가 WTO 협정과 일치되지 않는 방향으로 제정, 운영되고 있기 때문이다. 본 논문에서는 중국의 반덤핑 법과 WTO 반덤핑협정을 비교 분석하여, 중국의 반덤핑 법이 WTO 반덤핑협정과 합치되는지를 살펴보고자 한다. 또한 이러한 비교분석을 통하여, 중국조사당국이 자국의 반덤핑 법을 운영하는데 있어서 자국산업의 보호를 목적으로 남용 할 수 있는 여지가 있는지를 살펴보고, 중국의 반덤핑규정 남용을 방지하기 위하여 양자나 다자협상(DDA 규범협상)을 통한 우리나라의 대응방안을 간략히 서술하고자 한다. Notwithstanding that an antidumping measure is one of the most effective trade remedies against unfair trade practices in international trade, the antidumping measure has been used more frequently as a non-tariff barrier to trade - that is, protectionist abuse of the antidumping measure. The abuse of antidumping measure is, of course, due to the textual ambiguity of the existing AD agreement. However, such abuse of the antidumping measure is more fundamentally associated with the implementation of the AD agreement at home. In other words, when implementing the AD agreement at home, Members adopts and apply laws and regulations pertaining to the antidumping measure in the manner that is inconsistent with the AD agreement in order to protect their domestic industries. This WTO-inconsistent implementation of the AD agrement at home would usually results in the abuse of the antidumping measure. The abuse of the antidumping measure resulting from WTO-inconsistent implementation of the AD agreement at home should also be concerned when China domestically implement the AD agreement as required under the WTO agreement. In fact, after joining to the WTO, China has domestically adopted its own antidumping law and regulation, but it is still unclear that such adopted antidumping law and regulation are in compliance with the AD agreement. Accordingly, this article will first compare the China's antidumping law with the AD agreement to find out whether there is any inconsistency, which results in the abuse of the antidumping measure, between them. Based on such finding, from the viewpoint of international negotiations, whether bilateral or multilateral (DDA Negotiations on Rules), this article goes on to further provide suggestions that possibly rectify any inconsistency of China's antidumping law with the AD agreement in order to prevent the abuse of the antidumping measure by China.
고심도 균열암반대수층 수리지질특성 평가를 위한 정압주입시험 조사절차 및 현장적용사례 연구
이항복,박찬,박의섭,정용복,천대성,배성호,김형목,김기석 한국암반공학회 2023 터널과지하공간 Vol.33 No.5
In relation to the high-level radioactive waste disposal project in deep fractured rock aquifer environments, it is essential to evaluate hydrogeological characteristics for evaluating the suitability of the site and operational stability. Such subsurface hydrogeological data is obtained through in-situ tests using boreholes excavated at the target site. The accuracy and reliability of the investigation results are directly related to the selection of appropriate test methods, the performance of the investigation system, standardization of the investigation procedure. In this report, we introduce the detailed procedures for the representative test method, the constant pressure injection test (CPIT), which is used to determine the key hydrogeological parameters of the subsurface fractured rock aquifer, namely hydraulic conductivity and storativity. This report further refines the standard test method suggested by the KSRM in 2022 and includes practical field application case conducted in volcanic rock aquifers where this investigation procedure has been applied.
李恒馥 법무부 2003 통상법률 Vol.- No.54
Article 11.3, also known as the sunset provision, of the AD Agreement requires the termination of an antidumping measure after five years from its imposition unless a review investigation finds that termination would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. The sole exception under Article 11.3 occurs where the termination of an antidumping measure would likely lead to continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. This exception, however, has been abusively used among WTO Members, and as a result sunset reviews today under Article 11.3 are unlikely to lead to revocation of an antidumping measure. Such ineffectiveness of sunset reviews under Article 11.3 is stemmed from the problem that Article 11.3 fails to provide any definition as to what constitutes a proper likelihood determination standard. Due to this lack of a definition, the abusive and expansive use of the exception has been increased greatly among Members. Particularly, the US authorities in their sunset reviews have abused the exception outlined in Article 11.3 In conducting sunset reviews, the US authorities apply their own likelihood determination standard which actually is inconsistent with the standard that has been consistently endorsed by WTO jurisprudence. As a result of applying an improper likelihood determination standard in their sunset reviews, the US authorities have been able to impose dumping measures for longer than necessary. Against the above backdrop, with a view to finding a proper likelihood determination standard this article will first examine an appropriate interpretation of the term "likely" referred to in Article 11.3 in accordance with the interpretative approach, which has been consistently adopted by the WTO jurisprudence. Based on such interpretation, this article goes on to further define a proper likelihood determination standard under Article 11.3. Finally, in light of the above analysis, this article aims at proving that the standard applied by the US authorities to the likelihood determination in their sunset reviews is inconsistent with Article 11.3 of the AD Agreement, as such standard results in maintaining an antidumping measure for longer than is warranted.