자유무역협정과 수산물 원산지판정기준의 문제점과 해결방안 - 한ㆍ칠레 FTA와 한ㆍ싱가폴 FTA를 중심으로

최홍배(Hong-bae Choi) 한국국제상학회 2006 國際商學 Vol.21 No.1

  An internationally Harmonized Rules of Origin has not been yet built. It means each member countries could make out their own Rules of Origin on Free Trade Agreement(FTA). The Tariff Shift Rules have been employed as a criterion for determining the country of Origin in the most of FTA as well as NAFTA and WTO Harmonized Work Program. Although the Tariff Shift Rules are said to be clearly fit for determining the country of Origin, they are not wholly fit in case of fish and fishery products which have inherent characteristics as the primary industries.   Every FTA aims to create maximum trade benefit for the member countries, providing Rules of Origin as commercial policy instruments for preventing the benefit from flowing out. But because in most of FTA the countries have different characteristics by industries, especially fisheries, we need to take a more flexible response to the FTA in fish and fishery products. And it is necessary that more considerable Origin criterions should be applied for fish and fishery products in each FTA.

"은주시청합기"(隱州視聽合記)의 선행연구에 대한 검토

최홍배 ( Hong Bae Choi ) 한국세계지역학회 2010 世界地域硏究論叢 Vol.28 No.1

ICJ의 북해대륙붕사건에 관한 판례연구

최홍배(Choi Hong-Bae) 한국해사법학회 2000 해사법연구 Vol.12 No.1

연구논문(硏究論文) : 독도영유권의 역사적 문헌에 대한 선행연구의 검토 -조선전기 이전까지를 중심으로-

최홍배 ( Hong Bae Choi ) 한국해법학회 2010 韓國海法學會誌 Vol.32 No.2

한국 정부는 독도를 신라가 우산국을 정복한 AD. 512년부터 독도를 인지하고 있었다고 주장하고 있으며, 이것은 1454년 세종실록지리지 등 역사적 문헌이 증명하고 있다. 즉, 신라가 512년 현재의 울릉도에 있던 우산국을 복속시켰으며 이때 독도도 함께 복속되었다. 삼국사기는 512년 복속과 관련하여 울릉도에 대해서만 언급하고 있으나, 세종실록지리지에 와서는 현재의 독도가 우산도라는 것을 증명하고 있다. 독도는 맑은 날 울릉도에서 관측이 가능하므로 한국인들은 항상 독도를 울릉도의 부속도서로 간주해 왔다. 이 논문은 한국의 역사적 문헌에 나오는 우산도가 현재의 독도가 아니라는 일본측 주장에 대해 한-일 양국학자들의 선행연구의 논점을 비교 분석하고자 한다. Korea government claims that Dokdo has been an integral part of Korean territory since AD.512 when the ancient Silla Kingdom annexed Usanguk. Dokdo can be seen from Ulleungdo on a clear day, Koreans have always viewed Dokdo as a dependency or an appendage of Ulleungdo. Even though the Annalsof Kingdom Silla referred only to Ulleungdo in describing the 512 subjugation,Sejong SilokJiriji(世宗實錄) could be verified Usando, implying its derivation from Usan`guk as Dokdo in present. This article examines to analysis the opinions ofUsando is not to interpret Dokdo.

동아시아 해양영토 문제와 해결방안 -독도(Dokdo)를 중심으로-

최홍배(Choi, Hong-Bae) 동북아시아문화학회 2019 동북아시아문화학회 국제학술대회 발표자료집 Vol.2019 No.10

The official position of the Japanese government on Dokdo, Korea’s indigenous territory, is that Takeshima (Dokdo) is Japan’s inherent territory even in international law and international law. It is an illegal occupation and there is no legal justification for any action taken on Dokdo. On the other hand, the Korean government counters that ’the beautiful island of Korea, Dokdo is historically, geographically and international law, and is a unique territory of Korea. Summarizing the arguments for Korea’s and Japan’s claim to Dokdo, there are three different views. It is a matter of correct interpretation of historical ancient documents. It is a matter of legality of territorial incorporation by Japanese government in 1905. This is a matter of validity against the Peace Treaty and a series of measures. Because Japan’s logic on the Dokdo issue is very sophisticated and detailed, Dokdo is likely to be interpreted in the international community as Japan’s territory unless it systematically contradicts Japan’s logic of ownership of Dokdo. Therefore, it is necessary to review historical rights and relevant facts and international legal debates on Dokdo between Korea and Japan. We should consider how to solve the Dokdo issue in reality. What means exist for resolving the Dokdo dispute between Korea and Japan? The Korean side considers the Dokdo dispute a political one and will not appeal the Japanese’s ICJ complaint. How can we solve this problem by identifying Japanese lies and Korean truths? It is clear that this is our national task.

WTO 특혜원산지규정의 문제점

최홍배(Hong-Bae Choi) 한국해사법학회 2006 해사법연구 Vol.18 No.1

  WTO Ministerial Conference(6th) was held in Hongkong(12. 2005). The membership countries have to submit the report its own tariff schedule until July. 2006. Currently Korea have made FTAs with Chile and Singapore and this year is negotiating with U.S.A. In this situation, rules of origin is a commercial policy to protect infant industry. However, an internationally Harmonized Rules of Origin have not built. It means that each member country could make out its own Rules of Origin on FTA. The Tariff Shift Rules have been employed as a criterion for determining the country of Origin in the most of FTA as well as NAFTA and WTO Harmonized Work Program. But because in most of FTA the countries have different characteristics by industries, we need to take a more flexible response to protect the domestic industry. And it is necessary that more considerable origin criterions should be applied for each FTA. This study focused on the limitation of WTO rule and a plan to apply rules of origin on each FTA.

일본 EEZ에서 우리 어선나포에 대한 대응방안

최홍배(Hong-Bae Choi),최석윤(Seog-Youn Choi) 한국항해항만학회 2002 한국항해항만학회지 Vol.26 No.5

이 논문은 일본의 배타적 경제수역(EEZ)에서 한국어선의 피납실태를 분석하여 그러한 문제에 대한 대응방안을 제시하는 것을 그 목적으로 한다. 일본의 배타적 경제수역에서 벌어지고 있는 한국어선의 피납실태를 분석해 보면 우리나라의 어민들이 연근해 수산자원의 고갈과 해양오염으로 인하여 연근해조업이 곤란한 상황에서 수산자원이 풍부한 일본의 배타적 경제수역 경계선 부근이나 경계선을 침범하여 조업을 하고 있는 것으로 나타난다. 과거에는 그러한 행위가 관행상 자유로운 공해상의 조업이었지만 UN해양법협약(1994)과 한일어업협정(1999)이 발효함으로써 범법행위가 되었다. 그러한 문제를 해결하기 위해서는 장기적인 관점에서 어업정책의 방향전환, 어민들의 생계대책마련 및 한일양국의 어업관리 협조체제의 구축이 필요하다. 무엇보다 당장 시급한 것은 외국에서 집행된 형의 감면이며, 어업지도와 단속을 위한 인적ㆍ물적 자원의 확충 및 해양경찰과 해양수산부의 긴밀한 공조체제 구축도 시급한 것으로 보인다. This study aims to analyse the actual conditions of Korean fishing boot being seized in Japan’s EEZ and to provide the countermeasures against that problem. According to the analysis of that actual conditions, Korean fishermen are trespassing Japan’s EEZ in which fishery resources are abundant because of exhaustion of fishery resources and polluted water in Korean coastal seas. In the past, that behavior was not illegal. Now however, it became illegal with the effectuation of the United Nations Conventions on the Law of the Sea(1994) and the Korean-Japanese Fisheries Agreement (1999). In order to resolve that problem on a long-term basis, it is necessary to turn over national fishery policy, to provide fishing people with other means of living, and to establish the Korean-Japanese cooperation system of fishery management. Most of all, it is urgent to mitigate and remit a penalty which was executed in Japan, to amplify personal and material resources need to guide and control fishery, and to construct a close cooperation system between the National Maritime Police Agency and the Ministry of Maritime and Fisheries Affairs.

日本에 있어서 特許製品의 竝行輸入問題

최홍배(Hong-Bae CHOI) 대한국제법학회 2000 國際法學會論叢 Vol.45 No.2

WTO紛爭解決과 一方的措置의 合法性 問題考察

최홍배(Choi Hong-Bae) 한국무역학회 2000 貿易學會誌 Vol.25 No.4

WTO / TRIPs 협정에 의한 특허의 국제적 보호문제

최홍배(Hong Bae Choi) 한국국제통상학회 2000 국제통상연구 Vol.5 No.2

In today`s economic environment, intangible assets are becoming increasingly important. These assets which are the result of human intellectual creative activity such as invention, design, know-how, and artistic creation are known as intellectual property(IP). As the volume of trade in goods and services involving IP has increased greatly in recent years, the importance of the protection of IP has grown enormously. Inappropriate and insufficient protection of IP can distort free trade and arise the trade-friction problems. Thus, developing countries often limit protection to a very narrow subject area, or provide protection for only a short period of time, or lack strict enforcement. Some developed countries also have problematic IP regimes that, for example, openly discriminated against foreign nations. To address the trade distorting effect these problems can cause, the WTO sought to establish an appropriate framework for the protection of IP in order to bring greater order to international trade. A number of international treaties already form a common legal framework for the protection of IP, including the Paris Convention which entered into force in 1883 and covers patents, trademarks and other industrial property rights. Recently, however, as countries pay more attention to the trade related aspects of this subject, they have frequently placed IP protection on the agenda of trade negotiations. As a result, GATT negotiators instituted negotiations TRIPs-one of the most important new areas included in the UR. A final consensus on the TRIPs Agreement was reached in Marrakesh in April 1994 and took effect on January 1, 1995. In particular, the area of patents WTO/TRIPs establishes a wide definition of patentable subject matter, and requires members to introduce patent protection for products. The goal of this research is to review patent clause of WTO/TRIPs.