국제보건의료분쟁의 해결

손경한(Sohn Kyung Han) 충북대학교 법학연구소 2016 과학기술과 법 Vol.7 No.1

Since last century, international trade of pharmaceuticals and medical instruments have increased and healthcare insurance business expanded over the national border. Recently, international medical tourism and cross-border operation of medical institutions have become active. Accordingly, disputes in international healthcare area have also increased. This article focuses on international disputes between patients and medical service or products providers. The significant characteristics of the healthcare industry are the formation of healthcare community for its constituents. This is because healthcare is closely related to, and a part of social security system of a community. Such healthcare community can be formed nationally or regionally. The regional healthcare community may cover a part of a country or several countries. The healthcare community defines and regulates the relationship among the constituents, i.e., patients, medical service providers, drugs and medical products suppliers and health insurers. Even a private medical treatment contract between a patient and a medical institution is strongly influenced, if not governed, by the regime of the healthcare community. We can find many international conventions and treaties which mention or rule international healthcare matters. For example, the Charter of the United Nations, the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, International Covenant on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights, EU Charter of Fundamental Rights 2000, Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Discrimination Against Women, 1979, ILO Occupational Safety and Health Convention 1981, International Convention on the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of Their Families 1990, Convention on the Rights of Child 1989, Convention on the Rights of Persons with Disabilities 2006, The international trade laws also deal with health protection such as the WTO Treaty itself and the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures(SPS Agreement). As directed by Article 57 of the Charter of the United Nations, the International Health Organization Constitution was established in 1946 to form the WHO, which is in charge of the international public healthcare matters. The WHO has promulgated the International Health Regulations of which the most current version was amended in 2005. In addition to these international hard laws, there are numerous international soft laws in medical treatment. Some of the well known international rules are Nuremberg Code 1947, WMA International Code of Medical Ethics 1949(currently 2006), Declaration of Helsinki-Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects 1964 (currently 1974), Declaration of Alma-Ata at International Conference on Primary Health Care 1978, and WMA Declaration of Lisbon on the Rights of the Patient 1981 (currently 2015). Some of those rules became customary international laws. If not, they may be treated as a part of the “generally recognized international rules” as provided in Article 6 of the Korean Constitution or as those of the “general principles of law recognized by civilized nations”under the international law. Due to characteristics of healthcare service, the traditional rules of private international law do not apply to healthcare disputes. Rather, the law of the relevant healthcare community apples in most cases. The only exception is the case where the patient voluntarily left his home to get the healthcare service in a foreign country. In such case the law of patient’s healthcare community is excluded and the law of the healthcare institution will apply unless the parties agreed otherwise as to the governing law of the healthcare service.

기술활용으로서의 기술금융의 법적 전략

손경한(Sohn Kyung Han),이홍기(Lee Hong Kee) 충북대학교 법학연구소 2015 과학기술과 법 Vol.6 No.2

A Technology Finance is one of the effective way to utilize technology as financial assets. The purpose of technology utilization is to maintain and realize the value of technology. Traditionally, technologies are utilized for business establishments, technology license or technology transfer, which are the types of utilization that realizea usufruct or an exchangeable value. Technology finance can stimulate both values in simultaneously. Therefore, whom may want to utilize technology should consider technology finance with strategic concerns. With the importance of technology, technology finance also has a peculiar features of legal issues. For this reasons, legal strategy for technology finance as utilization may contemplated. Generally, legal strategy for technology finance should include the aspects of what to finance and how to finance. Most of the technologies are protected by intellectual property rights, so the legal application of intellectual property laws should be included. Commercial laws and many other acts which concerned with capital markets are as well. Meanwhile, specific considerations needs to be deliberated. During technology finance, technology holder should raise the investments, choose the way of securitization and consider the disclosure of financial intervention. In conclusion, the importance of legal strategy for technology finance has been raised, and must reflect the overall factors of technology utilization. This thesis focused on to reveal those factors and to lay out it. By doing so, technology can manifest its values as assets and the whole system of innovation will work well.

방송산업의 현황과 방송저작권의 과제

손경한(Kyung-Han Sohn) 강원대학교 비교법학연구소 2014 江原法學 Vol.42 No.-

방송의 제작과 유통 환경이 급격하게 변화하는 시대에 있어서 방송의 제작 및 유통에 관한 저작권이 문제되는바, 본고에서는 방송물의 다양한 활용을 위한 전제로서 방송물의 저작물성이 다투어지는 경우와 그 저작권귀속이 문제되는 경우 등을 중심으로 살펴보기로 한다. 먼저 방송산업의 현황(Ⅱ), 방송저작권의 개념과 특징(Ⅲ)을 살펴본 후, 방송저작권의 주요 쟁점(Ⅳ)으로서 방송물의 저작물성, 방송저작권의 귀속, 실연자등의 권리와 방송저작권, 저작권에 의하지 아니한 방송물의 보호의 순서로 검토한다. 이러한 검토를 토대로 방송산업의 변화와 방송저작권의 새로운 경향(Ⅴ)을 간략하게 정리하고자 한다. As information technology has been developed rapidly, broadcasting industry continues to experience dramatic and rapid changes. Under these situations, production and distribution environment in broadcast works also have been changing. Especially, broadcast makers are increasingly developing new business models to activate multi-use of broadcast works to be made. In order to meet with the rapidly-changing present broadcasting industry, copyright law regarding broadcasting becomes vital and necessary. This paper purported to provide an overview of major current issues in broadcast copyright in reflection to the rapidly changing broadcasting industry. The newly emerging issues include copyrightability of broadcast works, initial ownership of broadcast works, scope of copyright to be granted to the broadcast works, distribution of broadcast works via various media and new way of protection for broadcast works. In order to deal with these emerging issues, I firstly, addressed current situation of the broadcasting industry in the world(Ⅱ), and dealt with the need to redefine and to feature the concept of broadcast copyright as well as broadcasting itself(Ⅲ). Secondly, I reviewed main issues in the law of broadcast copyright in the 21 century such as copyrightability of broadcast works, ownership of broadcast copyright, right of the performers and record producers for broadcast works, and broadcast copyright and other protection methods for broadcast works(Ⅳ). Finally, based on the review stated above, I addressed briefly the areas of the laws on broadcast copyright which need to be improved(Ⅴ).

한국에서의 외국중재판정 승인의 실제

손경한(Sohn, Kyung Han) 한국국제사법학회 2014 國際私法硏究 Vol.20 No.2

오늘날 중재제도는 국제적 분쟁해결의 총아로 등장하여 급속한 속도로 국제적 통일을 이루어 가고 있을 뿐 아니라 국가 경쟁력의 한 지표가 되어 각국은 경쟁적으로 자국의 중재제도를 개선하여 국제중재사건을 자국에 유치하려는 전략을 쓰고 있다. 이점은 외국중재판정의 승인집행에 있어서도 마찬가지이다. 외국중재판정의 승인집행거부사유는 제한되는바 뉴욕협약의 적용을 받는 외국판정에 대한 승인 거부사유를 중심으로 먼저 피고가 주장하여야 하는 승인집행거부사유인 당사자의 행위무능력(Incapacity) 또는 중재합의의 무효(Invalidity), 부적절한 통지 (Inadequacy in notice) 등 방어권 침해, 중재인의 무권한 (Non-competence of arbitrators), 중재판정부 구성상의 하자(Improper constitution of tribunal), 구속력 없는 중재판정(Non-binding)에 관한 사례를 살펴보고 나아가 외국중재판정에 대한 직권 승인집행거부 사유인 중재적격성 부존재(non-arbitrability)와 공서위반 (violation of public policy)관한 사례를 살펴보았다. 그동안 우리 법원이 중재제도에 호의적인 태도를 가지고 외국중재판정을 한국에서 용이하게 집행할 수 있도록 하는 등 중재제도의 정착이 힘쓴 것은 높게 평가받아야 할 것이다. 또는 중재법제도 1999년 개정 이래 대한상사중재원이 국제중재규칙을 따로 제정하고 다른 부수 규정도 정비하여 국제적인 신인도를 제고하여 왔고 법무부도 중재법개정위원회를 하여 중재법의 경쟁력을 강화하는데 노력하여 왔다. 이와 관련한 외국중재판정 승인제도의 개선점으로는 외국중재판정의 승인에 있어 법원 관여 제한의 원칙 선언하고, 광범한 중재적격성의 인정하며, 절차적 공서 위반 사유를 구체적으로 입법하고 나아가 집행판결제도의 폐지를 폐지하는 한편 뉴욕협약의 적용을 받지 않는 중재판정의 승인요건을 개선할 필요가 있음을 지적하였다. 또한 이러한 국내법의 정비와 아울러 뉴욕협약의 보완이나 중재에 관한 양자조약의 체결 등을 통하여 중재에 관한 국제적 협력을 강화하는 한편 그 일환으로 외국중재판정의 승인요건을 완화하여 나가야 함을 적시하였다. Korea is a pro-arbitration country. Korea has enacted its Arbitration Act(“KAA”) in 1966 and joined the United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1958 (“the New York Convention”) in 1973. When Korea joined the New York Convention, it has made both the reciprocity and commerciality reservations. Due to Korea’s rapid economic growth and the explosive increase in international trade, Korean court has valued the arbitration as an effective mechanism for solving disputes arising in the international trade. In order to meet the needs of international business community, the KAA was amended in 1999, adopting the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration. In recognition and enforcement of foreign arbitral awards, Article 39 of the KAA provides limited grounds for rejection therof. The seven(7) grounds for refusal are (i) the arbitration agreement is not valid due to limits to a party’s capacity, (ii) the arbitration agreement is not valid for a reason other than limits to a party’s capacity under the law to which the parties have agreed to subject it (or, failing any indication thereof, under the law of Korea), (iii) the party making the application was unable to present its case in the arbitral proceedings, (iv) the arbitral award contains decisions on matters beyond the scope of the arbitration agreement or the claims in the arbitral proceedings, (v) the composition of the arbitral tribunal or the arbitral proceedings were not in accordance with the agreement of the parties or the Korean law, (vi) the dispute was not one that is capable of settlement by arbitration under the Korean law, or (vii) the award is in violation of public policy of Korea. Practically, the Korean courts have rather been supportive of arbitral awards and have generally refused to query the awards issued by both local and foreign arbitral tribunals. If an award has been set aside by a foreign court, the Korean court may refuse enforcement. However, if the foreign court has unreasonably set aside the award, there is a possibility that the award will be enforced in Korea although there is no case in Korea on the point yet. Korean arbitration law and system need to be further improved and Korean government and its arbitration body is working for that purpose.

중재합의의 준거법과 주관적 중재적격성

손경한(Sohn, Kyung Han) 한국국제사법학회 2017 國際私法硏究 Vol.23 No.1

이미 존재하는 중재합의의 일방 당사자와 그 계약과 관련 있는 제3자가 중재부탁계약을 하는 경우 중재부탁계약의 준거법을 결정함에 있어 일방당사자와 타방 당사자사이의 중재합의의 준거법을 제3자와 체결한 중재부탁계약의 준거법으로 하여 두 중재합의가 같은 운명에 놓고자 하는 것이 당사자의 의사였음을 추정함으로써 중재합의의 주관적 범위를 확장하고 주관적 중재적격성의 인정범위를 확대할 수 있다. 미국 계약법상 청약과 승낙, 청약의 묵시적 철회, 서면계약과 묵시적 승낙 등에 관한 이해가 필요하다. 미국법원은 미국 연방중재법의 적용범위를 가급적 확대하려는 태도를 보이고 있으며 중재에 관련한 주법과 연방법의 적용영역에 관하여 계약의 성립, 유효성, 취소 및 집행가능성에 관하여는 주법이 적용되나 계약에 서명하지 않은 제3자에게 미치는지 여부는 연방 실체보통법이 적용된다고 판시하였다. 본건에 있어서도 제3자의 중재당사자적격에 관한 미국 연방중재법과 캘리포니아주 판례를 적용하였더라면 이 분쟁은 조기에 해결될 수 있었을 것이다. 국제분쟁을 해결함에 있어서는 현지변호사를 바고 고용하기 보다는 국내의 국제분쟁해결전문가를 찾아 종합적이고 객관적인 의견을 받고 그에 기초하여 현지 전문가를 고용하는 것이 바람직하다. This case is regarding an arbitration agreement at a Stock Purchase Agreement between a California company and a Korean company where it was agreed the law of California State as the governing law and any disputes thereunder to be resolved by arbitration at the American Arbitration Association. A president of the California company, a Korean national, was added to the dispute. In the US, as to the governing law of the arbitration agreement, the formation and validity thereof is governed by the state law applicable to the contract formation, in this case, the California law. In California, acceptance to an offer can be communicated with effect, only by some act or omission of the party contracting, by which he intends to communicate it, or which necessarily tends to such communication. An offer is revoked by (a) by the communication of notice of revocation by the offeror to the other party, before his or her acceptance has been communicated to the former, (b) by the lapse of the time prescribed in the offer for its acceptance or, if no time is prescribed, the lapse of a reasonable time without communication of the acceptance. Performance of the conditions of an offer, or the acceptance of the consideration contained in the offer, is an acceptance of the offer. An offeree’s power of acceptance is terminated when the offeror takes definite action inconsistent with an intention to enter into the proposed contract and the offeree acquires reliable information to that effect. Rejection of an offer can also be made either explicitly or implicitly. The US Federal Arbitration Act and the federal substantive common law are broadly applied by the courts in the US including to the issue whether a third party is bound by an arbitration agreement, i.e., the issue of subjective arbitrability. In this case, the dispute would have been resolved early if the court and the arbitrator should have apply the Federal Arbitration Act and the case law of California as to the subjective arbitrability. We can get a lesson from this case that it is almost imperative for effective resolution of international disputes to consult with an expert in international dispute resolution rather than to hire a local attorney directly after a dispute arises.

문화재환수협약의 개요와 한국의 대응방안

손경한(Kyung Han Sohn) 한국국제사법학회 2009 國際私法硏究 Vol.- No.15

1995년 문화재환수협약은 외교적, 정치적 타협의 산물이었던 1970년 문화재불법거래금지협약으로부터 진일보하여 문화재 소유자 내지 기원 국의 유출 문화재에 대한 사법상의 권리를 인정하였다는 점에서 큰 의의가 있고 1970년 협약의 단점을 보완하는 동반조약(Companion Treaty) 으로서의 의미를 가지고 있다 하겠다. 그러나 본협약이 문화재 기원국 내지 유출국과 문화재 보유국 내지 유입국간의 입장 차이와 영미법과 대륙법간의 입장 차이로 인하여 당사자의 권리의무를 좀 더 명확하게 규정하지 못한 점은 아쉬움으로 남는다. 특히 본협약의 소급적 적용을 명시적으로 부정함으로써 해외로 유출된 문화재를 본협약을 통하여 환수하려는 희망을 가진 우리나라로서는 본협약에 가입하여야 할 필연적 인 이유를 발견하기 어렵게 하고 있는 바 이는 본협약의 중재한 결함이라고 할 것이다. 그러나 앞서본 바와 같이 본협약 제10조 제3항이 본협약으로 협약발효 전에 발생하였거나 본협약이 적용되지 않는 불법거래가 적법화되는 것은 아니며 본협약 테두리 외의 구제조치를 취할 수 있는 우리나라나 개인의 권리를 제한하지 않음을 명시하고 있으므로 국내법, 양자 조약 또는 지역적 협정을 통하여 본협약과 다른 해결을 모색할 수 있는 가능성은 남아있다 하겠다. 오늘날 외국 문화재반환의 문제는 그에 대한 법적 의무의 존부를 떠나 도덕적, 정치적 의무로서의 성격이 강조되고 있고 또 문화재 유출의 최대 피해자 중에 하나인 중국의 국력이 강해짐으로써 유출 문화재의 반환에 관한 국제정치적, 외교적 압력은 더욱 강화될 조짐을 보이고 있다. 이러한 관점에서는 우리나라는 본 협약에 가입하여 문화재환수에 관한 우리의 의지를 대외적으로 천명하고 이 문제에 관한 도덕적 우위를 점하는 한편 중국 등의 국가로 부터의 정치적 압력을 막는 방패 역할을 하도록 할 필요가 있다고 생각된다. 그런 관점에서는 앞서 언급한 바와 같이 더 이상 적기를 놓치기 전에 중국과의 양자협정을 체결하는 것을 적극적으로 검토할 필요가 있다고 할 것이다. 또한 본협약 가입을 위한 준비로서 문화재보호법을 정비하되 단편적인 개정에 머무르지 말고 장기적인 입장에서 다각적인 검토를 거쳐 입법을 하는 것이 타당할 것이다. International trafficking in cultural property has become an increasingly universal problem, affecting even the countries traditionally known as importing countries and, therefore, necessitating international regulations. Since the 1970 UNESCO Cultural Property Convention operates primarily through the diplomatic channel, the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention on Stolen or Illegally Exported Cultural Objects introduced private law provisions under which an action for restitution or return of cultural objects can bebrought before the court or other competent authority of the State Party. It is one of the significant achievements of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention that the State Party that lost cultural property due to illicit export can be a party to request return of the cultural property. The 1995 UNIDROIT Convention has set clear time limits which strike a balance between the needs of legal predictability and facilitating the recovery by the original dispossessed owner, in case of theft, or interested state, in case of illicit export. Under the 1995 NIDROIT Convention, the possessor of a cultural object required to return it is entitled, at the time of its restitution or return, to payment of fair and reasonable compensation provided that he/she neither knew nor ought reasonably to have known that the object was stolen or had been illegally exported. One of the big shortcomings of the 1995 UNIDROIT Convention is that it is not retroactive, i.e., it only applies between States Parties after their entry into force and covers only objects of illicit provenance, theft and/or illicit export. Also, many questions are not resolved by the Convention itself but referred to municipal law to be determined by private international law rules. If and when Korea considers accession to the 1995 Convention, it must review the merits and demerits of the Convention for Korea. Also, Korea must deliberate its relationship with Japan and China which have most critical interest in return of cultural property. Since many cultural properties have flown from China to Korea these days, Korea should clarify the problems with China before accession to the 1995 Convention. Korea’s accession to the Convention will strengthen its moral position in the global society for protection of cultural property, although it may weaken its legal position therein.

게임산업에 대한 법적 고찰

손경한 ( Kyung Han Sohn ) 건국대학교 법학연구소 2007 一鑑法學 Vol.11 No.-

In view of dramatically increasing e-game business of world and Korea, this paper gives certain legal and policy considerations on it. Mainly this paper explores various legal relationships between parties concerned: the relationship between (1) game investor and game developer, (2) game developer and game publisher, and (3) game publisher and game service provider, which all involve complex topics. The relationship between the game service provider and the users, which raises the most potential problems and issues arise, also requires analysis on the legal characteristic of the Game Service Contract which would be concluded by standard terms via on-line. The e-games that contain characteristics of both literary works and cinematographic material also raise the need for protection the intellectual property. Further the e-Game involves protection issues for game replay files and game items in addition to those of trademark and trade dress. Finally, concerning the negative side-effects of e-game, this paper sees the issue of regulation of e-game business, as well as new policies for development of game business noting that the game business is rapidly grown up as a essential business of cultural contents. The new draft Game Industry Development Act can provide possible answers to such issues.

디지털情報去來의 類型

孫京漢(Sohn Kyung Han),朴眞雅(Park Jina) 한국국제조세협회 2005 조세학술논집 Vol.21 No.2

Technological changes create new problems. The existing norm of domestic and international taxation is seriously affected by the advert of electronic commerce and digital technology. This article will attempt to examine the types of new digital information transactions and the characteristics of compensation payments under each type of the digital information transactions, in order to ascertain whether the taxation rules would match the types of the new digital information transactions as well as the economic reality. The article will firstly address the definition and the types of digital information, and the definition and characteristics of digital information transactions. Secondly, the rest of the paper will deal with various different types of digital information transactions and how they are divided and defined in accordance with specific legal classifications. In addition, this article will address characteristics of compensation payments under each type of the new digital information transactions. It is hoped that this study will be used in future amendments of the taxation rules for taxation on digital information transactions.

지식재산의 준거법에 관한 입법 방안

손경한(Sohn, Kyung-Han) 한국국제사법학회 2021 國際私法硏究 Vol.27 No.1

정보혁명과 그에 이은 4차산업혁명으로 촉발된 사회 환경의 변화는 국제사법과 지식재산법 을 비롯하여 우리 사회의 모든 법규범의 획기적인 변화를 강요하고 있다. 이러한 환경의 변화로 분쟁해결에 있어 법원에서의 재판보다는 ADR을 선호하게 됨으로서 국제사법의 중요 영역인 국제재판관할과 외국판결승인집행의 문제가 날로 줄어들고 있으며 국제재판관할 결정이나 준거법 지정에 있어서도 연결점이 상실되거나 모호해지고 있다. 또는 경쟁법 등 공법의 간섭이 심화됨으로써 국제사법이 불필요해지는 경향이 있다. 이처럼 전통적인 국제사법 이론이 적절하지 않은 상황으로 변하고 있어 국제사법도 위기에 봉착하였다. 지식재산법의 영역에 있어서도 중심이 특허에서 저작권으로 이동한지는 오래 되었고 이제는 지식재산권 보호에서 영업비밀보호와 부정경쟁방지라는 불법행위로 그 초점이 놓이고 있다. 나아가 그 보호대상에 있어서도 창작성을 요하는 지식재산의 범위를 넘어 데이터를 비롯한 무형재산 그 자체를 보호하는 데로 그 중점이 이동하고 있다. 본고에서는 이러한 사회환경의 변화를 지식재산의 관점에서 살펴보고 그에 적용될 새로운 준거법 결정 기준을 모색해 보고자 한다. 이처럼 새로운 준거법 결정 기준을 정립하기 위하여는 아래와 같은 점에 유의하여야 할 것이다. (1) 지식재산 환경의 변화와 (2) 지식재산법제의 글로벌한 변화를 숙지하고, (3) 지식재산에 관한 국제재판관할법제와의 정합성과 (4) 지식재산의 준거법에 관한 국제규범과의 정합성을 고려하면서도 (5) 지식재산의 모든 법률관계의 준거법 지정에 통용될 수 있는 일반 원칙을 제시하고 (6) 지식재산과 관련하여 높아진 대한민국의 국제적 위상을 반영하여 (7) 세계를 선도하는 선진적 입법을 제시하여야 할 것이다. 이러한 관점에서 필자는 지식재산 관련 준거법결정원칙으로 당사자자치의 원칙과 최밀접관련국법원칙을 주창하였다. 다만 당사자자치의 원칙을 관철하는 경우 부당한 결과가 나올 수 있으므로 그에 대한 적절한 한계를 설정하는 작업이 추가 되어야 하고 최밀접관련국 판단에 있어서도 구체적 기준을 제시하여 준거법 지정에 관한 공정성과 예측가능성을 제고하고자 하였다. 준거법 지정에 관한 예측가능성 제고는 기준의 제시로 가능할 수 있을 것이나 준거법의 공정성 확보는 국제사법 만으로는 해결하기 어려운 난제라 할 것이다. The transformation of the social environment triggered by the information revolution and the subsequent Fourth Industrial Revolution are forcing drastic changes in all legal norms in our society, including private international law and intellectual property law. Due to these changes in the environment, ADR is preferred over litigation in dispute resolution, and the major issues in private international law such as international jurisdiction and recognition & enforcement of foreign judgments are gradually decreasing day due to reduction of court cases. Also it became difficult to determine the governing law of a legal issue due to lack of or, at least, unclarity of the connecting factors(Anknuefungspunkt) thereto. Furthermore, as the need of interference of public law such as competition law has increased, rooms for the conflict of laws rule for application of private law tends to become diminishing. We are entering into an age that the fate of private international law is in crisis. In the field of intellectual property law, the focus has shifted from patents to copyrights for a long time, and now the focus is shifting from protection of intellectual property rights to protection from tortious acts such as trade secrets infringement and unfair competition. Furthermore, even in the subject of protection, the focus is shifting to protecting data and other intangible property itself, rather than creative works and achievements. In this paper, we look at these changes in the social environment from the point of view of intellectual property and try to find new standards for determining the law applicable thereto. In order to establish a new standard for determining the governing law of intellectual property issues, it is necessary to pay attention to the following points: (1) changes in the intellectual property environment; (2) global changes in the legal system of intellectual property; (3) compatibility with the international legal system of jurisdiction regarding intellectual property; (4) compatibility with international norms on the governing law of intellectual property; (5) carving general principles applicable to the governing law for various situations of intellectual property; (6) reflecting the upgraded status of Korea at the international intellectual property community; and (7) proposing of a model legislation for the days to come in the globalized world. From this point of view, the author advocated the principle of party autonomy and the principle of the most closely connected country as the principles for determining the law governing intellectual property instead of the traditional principles of lex protectionis or law of the origin. However, since allowance of the full party autonomy may results in unfairness, the setting of appropriate limits to the freedom of choice of law must be secured, and concrete and specific standards for determining the most closely connected country should be presented to enhance fairness and predictability of the governing law to be applied. Although it may be possible to improve the predictability of the governing law by adopting the above mentioned standards, realization of the fairness after application of such determined governing law would be a conundrum that can be hardly solved by the private international law alone.

오픈 사이언스를 위한 법제 개선방안

손경한 ( Sohn Kyung-han ),박진아 ( Park Jin-a ) 한남대학교 과학기술법연구원 2022 과학기술법연구 Vol.28 No.3

오픈 사이언스(open science)를 향한 거대한 시대적 조류가 형성되고 있다. 최근 오픈사이언스는 과학방법론으로서 전세계적으로 새로이 부상하고 있으며, 특히 4차 산업혁명과 코로나19 사태로 새로운 융합적 지식과 기술의 신속한 창출을 위해 모든 통로의 과학적 지식을 개방하고 공유하는 것을 추구하면서 그 흐름이 가속화되고 있다. 주요 선진국은 새로운 지식·가치의 창출과 공유·확산을 위해 디지털기반으로 연구성과와 과정을 개방화하고 국내외 민관학이 협력 연구하는 오픈사이언스 정책을 적극 추진하고 있는바, 우리나라의 경우에도 이러한 시대적 흐름에 부응하여 국가 차원의 오픈사이언스 정책을 수립함으로써 공공연구(publicly-funded research)의 공개·공유를 지원하여 그 유용성을 제고하고 가상연구환경을 통한 연구자간 상호협력을 활성화하는데 이바지함과 아울러 디지털 시대에 새로운 발견과 관점과 산업을 추동할 수 있는 계기를 마련하고, 국가 경쟁력과 경제 성장을 촉진할 필요가 있다. 이를 위한 법제적 과제로 오픈사이언스의 기본원칙을 과학기술기본법 등에 반영하는 등 오픈사이언스 정책을 법제화하는 방안을 마련할 필요가 있다고 할 것이다. 오픈사이언스가 “논문과 데이터의 오픈화”에서 데이터통합 플랫폼에서 데이터 공유, 접근과 과학자 협업까지 포함하는 개념으로 변화하는 현 시점에서 오픈사이언스에 대한 체계적인 이해가 절실하므로 본고에서는 오픈사이언스 개념 이해를 위하여 오픈사이언스의 개념과 그 개념의 필요성을 살펴보고, 오픈사이언스에 관한 국제규범의 발전 상황을 검토하고 그로부터 오픈사이언스의 기본 원칙을 도출한 다음 그를 기초로 우리나라 오픈사이언스 법제의 개선방안을 모색해 보고자 한다. A huge trend toward open science is being formed. Recently, open science is emerging worldwide as a methodology of scientific research. In particular, the flow is accelerating as we seek to open up and share scientific knowledge in all channels for the rapid creation of new convergence knowledge and technology due to the 4th industrial revolution and the COVID-19 crisis. Major advanced countries are actively promoting open science policies to open digital-based research results and processes to create, share, and spread new knowledge and values, and conduct collaborative research between domestic and foreign public and private academies. Accordingly, in the case of Korea as well, it is necessary to enhance the usefulness of publicly-funded research by supporting the disclosure and sharing of publicly-funded research results and processes by establishing a national open science policy in response to this trend. In addition, it should contribute to vitalizing mutual cooperation among researchers through the virtual research environment. Through this, it is necessary to provide an opportunity to drive new discoveries, perspectives and industries in the digital age, and to promote national competitiveness and economic growth. For this purpose, it is necessary to prepare a way to legislate open science policies, such as reflecting the basic principles of open science in the Framework Act on Science and Technology. Currently, the concept of open science is changing from “open scientific publications and research data” to a concept that includes data sharing, access, and scientist collaboration on a data integration platform, and an accurate understanding of open science is urgently needed. Therefore, in this paper, the concept of open science and the necessity of the concept will be examined first in order to understand the concept of open science. Second, the development of international norms on open science will be reviewed, and third, the basic principles of open science will be derived from it. Lastly, based on the above review, I would like to explore ways to improve Korea's open science legislation.