대학시설계획과 소요판단방법

황지현,Hwang, Ji-Hyeon 대한건축사협회 1987 建築士 Vol.1987 No.4

대학시설의 관리방향

황지현,Hwang, Ji-Hyeon 한국대학교육협의회 1984 大學敎育 Vol.12 No.-

대학도서관의 시설계획

황지현,Hwang, Ji-Hyeon 대한건축사협회 1987 建築士 Vol.1987 No.5

디지털 무역규범의 국제적 논의에 관한 연구

황지현,김용일,Hwang, Ji-Hyeon,Kim, Yong-Il 중소기업융합학회 2021 융합정보논문지 Vol.11 No.10

디지털 무역의 확산으로 글로벌 통상환경 하에서 디지털 무역이 차지하는 비중이 높아지고 있다. 그러나 국제적인 디지털 통상규범이 부재한 상황이므로 새로운 무역규범 정립을 위한 논의는 중요한 의의를 가진다. 세계 각국은 자국의 이익을 고려한 디지털 무역정책을 시행하고 있으나 상이한 규제정책으로 통상갈등을 초래하고 있다. 국경 간 데이터의 자유로운 이동에 따른 개인정보 침해에 대한 안전장치를 마련하기 위해 세계 주요국들은 데이터 지역화 조치를 취하고, EU는 GDPR을 발효하였다. 개인정보가 포함된 데이터의 이전을 제한하는 규제들은 디지털 기업들의 경영활동에 장애요인이 될 수 있다. 그리고 주요국들이 도입한 디지털세에 관하여 미국은 디지털세 부과를 차별적인 조치인 무역장벽으로 간주하고 있으며, 일부 국가들은 자국에 미칠 부정적인 영향을 우려해 디지털세 도입을 반대하고 있다. 그러나 OECD와 G20을 중심으로 이루어진 글로벌 디지털세에 관한 논의가 진전을 보이면서 디지털세 합의안이 연내에 도출될 가능성이 높기 때문에 이에 대한 대응책도 마련해야 하는 상황이다. 그러므로 본 연구는 디지털 무역 규범의 최근 동향을 고찰하고, 디지털 무역의 핵심 쟁점들을 분석함으로써 향후 우리나라 통상정책 방향에 대한 시사점을 제시하였다. With the spread of digital trade, the share of digital trade under the global trade environment is increasing. However, since there is no international digital trade standard, the discussion to establish a new trade rule has important significance. Countries around the world are implementing digital trade policies in consideration of their own interests, but different regulatory policies are causing trade conflicts. In order to provide safeguards against personal information infringement due to the free movement of data across borders, major countries around the world have taken measures to localize data, and the EU has enacted GDPR. And the United States regards the imposition of the digital tax as a trade barrier, and some countries oppose the implementation of the digital tax for fear of negative impact on their countries. However, discussions on the global digital tax, centered on the OECD and the G20 are making progress. As it is highly likely that a digital tax agreement will be drawn up within this year, countermeasures must also be prepared. Therefore, this study presents implications for the future direction of Korea's trade policy by examining recent trends in digital trade norms and analyzing major issues in digital trade.

국제투자분쟁에서 공정·공평 대우에 관한 ICSID 중재사례 연구

황지현(Ji Hyeon HWANG) 한국무역상무학회 2016 貿易商務硏究 Vol.71 No.-

In determining the content of the FET standard, the tribunals stated protection of investor’s legitimate expectations, due process and denial of justice, transparency, discrimination and arbitrariness, good faith, etc. The most major elements of the FET standard is the protection of the investor’s legitimate and reasonable expectations. It is necessary to considerwhether it is possible towhat the expectations of investors are protected as legitimate and it is formed under any circumstances. If host state frustrate investor’s legitimate expectations, it found a breach of the FET. The host state’s specific assurance may reinforce investor’s expectations, but such explicit statement is not always necessary. The host statemust preserve a stable environment for investments.However, Itmust not be understoodas the inalterability of the host state’s legal framework. It implies that the host state’s subsequent changes should bemade consistently and predictably. The host state is entitled to exercise a reasonable regulatory authority to respond to changing circumstances in the public purpose. Therefore,whether the violation FET shall be determined through a balanced against the investor’s legitimate expectations and the host state’s reasonable regulatory exercise in the public interest. And investor should keep inmind that the principle of proportionality is applied unless host state provides stabilization clause or similar commitments to investor. Also host state should establish the basis of an argument about reasonable regulatory authority for public interest.

국제물품매매에서 손해배상과 관련한 실무상 유의점에 관한 연구

황지현(Hwang, Ji Hyeon),최영주(Choi, Young Joo) 한국무역상무학회 2012 貿易商務硏究 Vol.55 No.-

This study considered as precautions in light of practical affairs related to a claim for damages focusing on CISG (1980) and PICC (2004). Given summarizing contents of this study, those are as follows. First, when exercising a claim for damages, proving the damages may be difficult and hard. Thus, there is necessity for stating the liquidated damages clause in contract given conclusion of contract. Second, as for the application of interest rate given a claim for interest, CISG is not covered interest rate. PICC is covered interest rate. However, there is possibility that PICC will not be applied as general principles. Thus, to remove this insecurity and uncertainty, there is necessity for stating this in contract by deciding on the detailed standard stipulation after fully discussing about interest payment with the counterpart given sale contract. Third, when a seller delivered non-conformity of the goods for contract, a buyer is desirable to exercise by discreetly judging the exercise method or limitation element on a problem of selecting and exercising remedy favorable to oneself out of a claim for damages and a right to reduce the price. Finally, There was suggestion that the contract parties are desirable to utilize by modifying and supplementing properly this in line with own business-based necessity and situation based on the ICC Model International Sale Contract, and to state CISG and PICC the governing law clause, in preparing contract. This study is expected to possibly become guideline in which the damaged party exercises a claim for damages or aims to cope with the counterpart’s exercising a claim for damages.

국제투자분쟁에서 예외조항과 긴급피난의 관계에 관한 연구 - 아르헨티나의 ICSID 중재사례를 중심으로 -

황지현(Ji-Hyeon HWANG),김용일(Yong-Il KIM) 한국무역상무학회 2021 貿易商務硏究 Vol.92 No.-

아르헨티나의 국제투자분쟁 사건은 유사한 사실관계하에서 중재판정부가 투자협정상의 예외조항과 국제관습법상의 긴급피난을 어떻게 해석하고 적용하는지에 따라 상이한 판정이 내려졌기에 중요한 의의를 가진다. 그러므로 본 연구는 아르헨티나의 ICSID 중재사례를 분석함으로써 국제투자협정상의 예외조항과 국제관습법상의 긴급피난과의 관계에 대하여 살펴보고자 한다. 아르헨티나가 경제위기를 극복하기 위해 취한 일련의 조치를 투자협정에 규정된 예외조항으로 볼 수 있는지를 검토하고, 투자협정상의 예외조항과 국제관습법상의 긴급피난 관계에 대하여 중재 판정부의 해석 및 적용 기준을 고찰함으로써 시사점을 도출하고자 한다. Argentina"s cases of international investment disputes are significant. Because under similar facts, the arbitral tribunal made different decisions depending on how the arbitral tribunal interprets and applies the exception clause under international investment agreement and the necessity under customary international law. When an international investment dispute arises due to a series of measures taken for public purposes in an emergency situation, the host state seeks to defend by citing the exception clause or the necessity. The exception clause and the necessity differ in content and function. The exception clause under international investment agreement recognizes the policy discretion of the host state. And by excluding the application of the obligations under investment agreement, it allows the host state to take measures that are inconsistent with the obligations under investment agreement. The Necessity under customary international law can separate the illegality from the illegal activity of the state, subject to strict requirements. Therefore, the exception clause under international investment agreement and the necessity under customary international law should be approached as separate defenses, each with its own requirements. In interpreting the exception clause under international investment agreement, the necessity under customary international law can be applied supplementarily. However, it should be noted that it may be supplemented by other analytical methods as a matter of interpretation.

포괄적 보호조항의 적용범위에 관한 연구

황지현(Ji-Hyeon Hwang) 한국무역학회 2016 貿易學會誌 Vol.41 No.5

ICSID 중재의 물적 관할에 관한 연구

황지현(Ji-Hyeon HWANG),장은희(Eun-Hee JANG) 한국무역상무학회 2018 貿易商務硏究 Vol.79 No.-

The ICSID Convention stipulates the need for investment, but does not specify the definition of investment, so there is much controversy over the scope of investment. Therefore, this study considers the meaning and scope of investment required to establish jurisdiction over ICSID Convention Article 25 focusing on ICSID cases. Many Arbitral Tribunal judges that the interpretation of the investment satisfies the requirements such as the a contribution of money or assets, an element of risk, a certain duration, a contribution to the economic development of the host state. In interpreting the investment, it is desirable to consider the general meaning of the investment under the ICSID Convention, the definition of the investment specified under the BIT, and the meaning of the investment under the general principles of law in international law. If the scope of the investment is broadly defined under the BIT, the scope of the investment in the ICSID Convention should be broadly interpreted accordingly. However, there is a view that even if the scope of investment in the BIT is broadly defined, the investment in Article 25 of the ICSID Convention should be interpreted in a general sense, and the ICSID Convention does not apply to a wider investment beyond this. In relation to the legality of the investment, only the investment that meets the laws and regulations of the host state is protected, and the illegal investment in violation does not constitute the jurisdiction of the arbitral tribunal. Many arbitral tribunals consider legitimacy to be an important element of investment.

투자분쟁해결규정에 MFN 조항의 적용여부에 관한 연구

황지현(Ji-Hyeon Hwang) 한국무역학회 2017 貿易學會誌 Vol.42 No.4