複合運送시스템 道入에 따른 傳統的인 貿易條件의 變化에 대한 硏究

柳海民 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 1986 貿易經營論集 Vol.1 No.-

The purpose of this thesis is to clarify the change of traditional trade terms with the recent introduction of combined transport system. Combined transport accelerated by the advent of container refers to the carriage of goods by at least two different modes of transport on the basis of a combined transport contract from a place in one country where the goods are taken in charge by the combined transport operator to a place designated for delivery in a different country. Combined transport has made certain traditional practice vitually obsolete. In today's combined transport system, the ship's rail no longer makes much sense as a point for the division of functions, costs and risks between the contracting paties. The point has shifted from the ship's rail to seaport of inland terminal, where the goods are frequently stowed in containers or trailers, or flats or pallets. Consequently, the new transportation techniques and the changed documentary practices received special attention in the 1980 revision of Incoterms. In the new trade term "Free Carrier(FRC)", "Freight or Carriage paid to (DCP)", "Freight, Carriage and Insurance paid to (CIP)", The ship's rail has been replaced as a "critical point"by the "named point,"where the carrier is to take the goods into his custody. It is a cargo terminal at the seaport or inland depot. These three terms have been designed to meet the requirements of combined transport such as container or "roll on-roll off"traffic by trailers and ferries. The risk of loss of or damage to the goods is transferred from seller to buyer at that time when the goods have been taken into the carrier's charge.

뉴욕協約下에서의 東西國家間 商事仲裁에 관한 硏究

金相浩 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 1989 貿易經營論集 Vol.5 No.-

As the world trade has expanded. international commercial arbitration has gotten into the spotlight as a self-controlled system of solving disputes between trade parties. Arbitration is the reference of a dispute by voluntary agreement of the parties to an impartial third person for determination on the basis of evidence and arguments presented by such parties, who agree in advance to accept the decision of the arbitrators as final and binding. Arbitration, therefore, is a quasi-judicial proceeding and different in nature from conciliation, mediation, negotiation and fact-finding. International commercial arbitration has gained widespread acceptance all over the world after the first World War and this led the League of Nations to create both the Geneva Protocol on Arbitration Clauses of 1923 and the Geneva Convention on the Execution of Foreign Arbitral Awards of 1927. Although the Geneva Protocol and the Geneva Convention as mentioned above contributed to the development of international comnmercial arbitration, they were still considered inadequate in connection with the field of application, the burden of proving the conditions necessary for the enforecement of the arbitral award, etc. These inadequacies prompted the United Nations to launch a project for a new international convention after the Second World War and the result thereof was the New York Convention. The New York Convention(formally called "United Nations Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards") done in New York on June 10,1958 has been adhered to by 75 States at the time of this writing, among which are almost all important trading nation s from the Capitalist and Socialist World as well as many developing countries. The New York Convention can be considered as the most important Convention in the field of arbitration and as the cornerstone of current international commercial arbitration. In this connection, it must be stressed that under the New York Convention, commercial arbiration also plays a specific role of settling disputes that arise from commercial contracts and industrial cooperation contracts, or special agreements between market economy and socialist countries. Commercial arbitration between market economy and socialist countries will be used more frequently within the framework of the bilaterial agreements of governmental or nongovernmental level which have been concluded in the past between socialist and capitalistic economy countries. The contents of these agreements vary, but most of them have the following elements in common: (1)mutual exchange of information on arbitration, and assistance in case where nationals of one of the countries concerned are involved; (2)an arbitration clause which of recommended for insertion in contract between nationals of the two countries concerned.

活動-基準原價計算(Activity-Based Costing)의 現況과 發展方向

陸根孝 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 1991 貿易經營論集 Vol.7 No.-

대학생의 여가생활 유형과 레포츠용품 구매시 상점선택 동기에 관한 실증분석

高景淳,朴汶奎 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 1992 貿易經營論集 Vol.8 No.-

産業構造 高度化를 위한 方案 : 釜山의 경우

姜泉 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 1993 貿易經營論集 Vol.9 No.-

한국무역정책의 성과와 과제

최성철 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 1992 貿易經營論集 Vol.8 No.-

美國의 通商政策과 輸出自律規例

李映勳,李揆勳 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 2000 貿易經營論集 Vol.4 No.-

以上과 같이 美國의 通商政策과 輸出自律規制에 관한 문제를 美國의 通商法의 內容과 그 運用을 통하여 考察함으로써 美國은 自由賢易또는 公正賢易을 표방하면서도 교묘한 手段으로 保護寶易主義에 따른 政策을 계속 추구하고 있음을 알 수 있다. 특히 輸出自律規制는 非밟IJ 度的,非公式的으로 시행되며 GATT 에 報告도 되지 않으므로 그 규모를 파악하기가 더 어렵다. 輸出自律規制가 輸出入國모두에게 바람직하지 못함에도 불구하고 輸入國은 GATT 11,12, 13條를 회 피 할 수 있으며 法的過程이 不必要하고 그 發動이 신속히 이루어질 뿐만 아니라 政治的인 이유 때문에 선호되고 있다. 또한 輸出業者도 항상 위협이 되고 있는 시장상황변화의 위험을 감소시켜 주기 때문에 다소 선호하는 경향도 있다. 그러나 輸出自律規制로 인해 또다른 輸入國 市場攪亂을 야기시킬 수 있으며 결국에는 全世界가 모두 輸出自律規制를 實施하게돼 保護主義는 결코 해결될 수 없게 된다. 現在美國은 輸出自律規制가 1988年經合賢易法 201條에 명확히 明示되어 있지 않음에도201조에 의거하여 실시하고 있다. 우리나라의 경우 輸出自律規制로 美國에 의해 規制받고 있는 것은 (표 II -10) 에 의하면 普通鋼1件으로 84年10월부터 規制받고 있을 뿐이지만 美國은 점차 輸入規制手段으로 輸出自律規制에크게 의존하는 경향이 있고,美國의 國際廳爭力이 약한 塵業에 대해서는 언제든지 發動 可能性이 매우 높기 때문에 이에 대해 효과적으로 對應할 政策이 사전에 다각적으로 수립되어야 한다.

經營者의 恣意的 行動과 會計規制의 經濟的 影響

金東律 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 2000 貿易經營論集 Vol.4 No.-

Accounting regulation refers to explicit legislative and administrative controls over the process of selection of specific alternative reporting method, measurement systems, and disclosure techniques form among all that might be available for financial reporting by business enterprises. The fundamental dispute over regulation has been between those who consider that it is necessary and those who do not. The ground for reporting regulation is that there is economic disequilibrium. On the other hand, those who consider that regulation is not necessary contend that it entails costs being incurred by information producers;that these are not justified in terms of the pricing mechnism for securities;and that mechanism already exist for adequate disclosure of an adequate quality without regulatory intervention. This article attempts to develop a fnamework for the consideration of issues regarding financial reporting regulation. In doing so, information is viewed as an economic commodity. The issue will be viewed as regulating the flow of information to the investment community. Economic issues fall into two major categories: issues of efficiency and issues of equity. The first category is concerned with the most efficient means of achieving some specified result. Movement to a more efficient solution could in principle result in everyone in the economy being in a more preferred position(or at least as preferred a position)with no one being in a less preferred position(called a Pareto-optimal solution). The second category, issues of equity, deals with the choice among efficient solutions in which each solution will leave some individuals better off but others worse off. Issues on how wealth should be distributed among individuals in the economy is one example of an issue of equity. The government becomes involved in both types of issues. However, the rationale for governmental intervention can vary considerably depending upon the type of issue involved. Therefore, it is imperative to state the extent to which the rationale for disclosure regulation rests on efficiency or equity considerations. In general, the government has a variety of means available to deal with these issues, including the enforcement of private contracts, the definition and enforcement of property rights, taxation, regulation, and direct ownership. The Securities Acts provide two primary means by which the flow of information to investors is affected. First is the general antifraud provisions; the second is the power to explicitly mandate financial reporting via the SEC filings and annual reports to shareholders. This article examines, the political process's effect on management's choice of accounting practice. The reason the political process affects accounting practice is because information, lobbying, and coalition costs are assumed to be positive. Economists views the political process as a competition for wealth transfers. Because information, lobbying, and coalescing to affect the political process is costly, some individuals decide to remain ignorant, just as some shareholders remain ignorant of the firms they own and free ride on others' monitoring. But if the magnitude of monitoring costs to reduce managerial opportunism and wealth transfers is substantially larger in the political process than in the market process, the political process will exhibit more opportunistic behavior than the market process. To the extent that a given firm is subject to potential wealth transfers in the political process, its managers is hypothesized to adopt accounting procedures that reduce the transfer. In particular, managers of firms that are blamed for a "crisis" are more likely to use accounting procedures that reduce expected earnings and the variance of earnings than are managers of firms that are not subject to these political pressures. Managers of regulated firms also take account of how their regulators use the reported numbers. In this article the nature of political process and information's role in that process are described, and then the effects on accounting are detailed. Based on the economic analysis of the political process and its impact on accounting, the management's arbitrary behavior and the economic consquences of accounting regulation are dicussed.

노사관계를 위한 회계정보공시

김동률 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 1989 貿易經營論集 Vol.5 No.-

Disclosure itself does not guarantee union influence over management decisions. Underlying this article has been the assumption that information is a resource in industrial relations which may be used by both sides. Generally, non-disclosure is likely at least to maintain the position of management. Disclosure, where it is controlled by management, is also must likely to maintain or strengthen management. It has been argued that the union side must adopt a decision-orientated approach if it is to benefit from more extensive disclosure and to use information to influence management decisions. The area of disclosure of accounting information to unions appears to be 'wide-open' as far as the need for systematic research is cencerned, from not only demand (union) and supply (management) perspectives, but from the point of view of public policy as well. The ideological view point asopted by researchers in this area would serve to delimit their perspective and the issues they consider to be legitimate research questions; thus, such reseach whether mainly theoretical or empirical in orientation (and indeed, whether normative or positive in intent), would appear to need to be based expicitly upon an ideology or framework, with biases laid open, to be of significant value. Such an approach is consistent with recent entreaties in the literarure to be explicitly normative, descriptive, and critical.

美國法上 保險代位의 根據와 要件

李尙洙,鄭容相 釜山外國語大學校貿易經營硏究所 1994 貿易經營論集 Vol.10 No.-