국제적 전자송달에 관한 연구

김효정 ( Kim Hyo Jung ),박우경,서용성,김성화 사법정책연구원 2021 연구보고서 Vol.2021 No.7

In international litigation, the time length required for the service of judicial documents is ordinarily much longer than that of domestic litigation. So it is necessary to significantly shorten the service period by utilizing international service mechanism using electronic means in order to expedite the litigation. In addition, in the cross-border cases where the defendant’s domicile is unknown despite the e-mail address is identifiable, we need to explore some available and affordable service methods to ensure that the lawsuit would proceed smoothly and that the recognition and enforcement of the relevant judgment would not be refused in the subsequent phase by serving the judicial documents through e-mail account. The international e-service of judicial documents has currently been recognized in (ⅰ) 2018 proposal for amending “EU Council Regulation (EC) No. 1393/2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (“EU Service Regulation”)”, (ⅱ) “European Small Claims Procedure Regulation”, (ⅲ) “Universal Postal Convention” as well as common law countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada. However, Korea does not explicitly allow international e-service of judicial documents like Japan and Germany. The reason for the difficulty to implement international e-service in the court’s practice in Korea is that there exist no explicit regulations on international service using electronic means under the bilateral treaties on judicial assistance concluded by Korea, or the Civil Procedure Act and the Act on International Judicial Mutual Assistance in Civil Matters. And further reason could be found in that Korea made a declaration pursuant to Article 10(a) of the “Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (hereinafter “HCCH Service Convention”)” at the time of its accession. The purpose of this study is to examine whether international electronic service could be allowed under the current international service system in Korea, and to present a concrete introduction scheme for international e-service of judicial documents in civil and commercial cases. To this end, this paper has reviewed on the availability and appropriateness of introduction of international delivery through e-mail and security e-platform, and has focused on designing its institutional/technical introduction plan and legal introduction plan respectively. First of all, in reviewing the institutional/technical introduction plan for international service by e-mail, this study has scrutinized the necessity of developing an e-mail service that maintains security in terms of guaranteeing the right of defense of the person to be served is examined. In this regard, this study has analyzed the online registered mail system, Korea’s “#mail” and Germany’s “De-Mail”, as well as a plan to incorporate PGP (Pretty Good Privacy) into general e-mail. Based on this research, some implications were drawn that the e-mail system which Korea will develop for international e-service should have the functions as follows: (ⅰ) function to encrypt the contents of electronic service and block/dissolute the account when exposed to the risk of hacking by a third party, (ⅱ) function of user identity confirmation, (ⅲ) functions of transmission and reception confirmation, reading confirmation and documentation. Furthermore, this paper has proposed requirements for accreditation of e-mail service providers and also the requirements for equal handling of domestic e-mail service providers and foreign e-mail service providers. As for institutional/technical introduction methods of international service through the security e-platform, this study has addressed a set of assessments involving (ⅰ) a plan to utilize a domestic electronic litigation system and (ⅱ) a plan to develop an international e-service platform jointly with other countries. In case of Korea, it would be desirable to establish an international e-service platform jointly with as many countries as possible, nevertheless it might be difficult to achieve such results in the foreseeable future. Therefore, it is expected to try to establish an international e-service platform among Korea, China and Japan in the first place by making reference to the example of the European e-Justice Portal. As regards legal methods for the introduction of international e-service, this study has also dealt with the requirements for international e-service and legal measures necessary for the introduction of international e-service. The followings are suggested as the requirements for international service by e-mail: (ⅰ) the person to be served must have explicitly agreed to use a specific e-mail account for the purpose of delivering the judicial document, (ⅱ) the law of the foreign country in which service is conducted does not prohibit service by e-mail, (ⅲ) service shall be performed by an e-mail service provided by an accredited domestic e-mail service provider, (ⅳ) the e-mail account to be served shall be an account provided by an accredited domestic service provider or a foreign e-mail service that is treated equally. On the other hand, as the requirements for allowing international service through the security e-platform, this study has also suggested that (ⅰ) the person to be served must have explicitly agreed to deliver the court documents through the security e-platform, (ⅱ) the law of the foreign country which the service is performed does not ban service through the security e-platform. The proposed legal measures requisite for international e-service shall include: (ⅰ) the stipulation of international e-service under the bilateral treaty and the expansion of the countries signing the bilateral treaty and memorandum of understanding, (ⅱ) the easing of the declaration of objection under the Hague Service Convention, (ⅲ) the amendment of the Civil Procedure Act, Act on International Judicial Mutual Assistance in Civil Matters, and the Act on the Use, etc. of Electronic Documents in Civil Litigation, etc. In reviewing the ways how to introduce international e-service, interdisciplinary and integrated research in the field of international civil procedure law and technology would be prerequisite, and furthermore the difference between ex officio and party-initiative service, the equivalence and harmonization with domestic electronic service, and the special nature of international service should be carefully considered and weighed. It is expected for this study to play a momentum and constitute a continuum in the furtherance of more active discussions and research on the introduction of international e-service, aiming at implementing international e-service in practice, and ultimately to ensure the expedition of lawsuits and the reduction of judicial costs.

금융회사 내부통제의 금융법상 지위 : 규제의 내부화·민영화의 관점에서

정순섭 법무부 2010 선진상사법률연구 Vol.- No.49

첫째, 금융규제를 외부적 규제와 내부적 규제로 구분할 때 금융규제의 완화는 외부적 규제의 완화를 의미하는 것으로 인식하는 것을 전제로 내부통제기준은 금융회사에 대한 내부적 규제의 일환으로서 외부적 규제가 완화되는 것과 비례하여 그 의무와 책임의 범위가 더욱 엄격하고 명확하게 규정되어야 한다. 둘째, 준법감시, 감사(또는 감사위원회), 자율규제 등 금융회사에 대한 다른 감시 장치와 내부통제는 다음과 같이 구별된다. 내부통제는 금융회사에 대한 내부적 규제 장치라는 점에서 외부적 규제에 속하는 자율규제와 구별되고, 외부적 규제를 대체하는 수단으로서 외부적 법 규제에 대한 준수 여부의 확인을 목적으로 하는 점에서 역시 같은 내부적 규제에 속하지만 주로 주주 등 이해관계인의 관점에서 경영진의 업무수행 전반에 대한 적법성 확인을 목적으로 하는 감사 또는 감사위원회와 구별된다. 또한 내부통제는 법적 위험뿐만 아니라 금융회사의 경영활동 전반에 걸친 다양한 위험에 대한 통제를 목적으로 하는 점에서 주로 법적 위험의 관리를 목적으로 하는 준법감시와 구별된다. 셋째, 기업 활동에 수반되는 각종 위험의 관리를 위하여 모든 기업이 구축하고 있는 다양한 위험관리태세와 준법감시를 포함한 내부통제는 그러한 일반적인 위험관리태세의 적정한 구축과 목표달성 여부도 그 관리대상에 포함하고 있는 점에서 차이가 존재한다. 그러나 위에서 본 바와 같이 실무에서 준법감시인제도와 관련하여 감사 또는 감사위원회제도와 상충되는 것으로 보거나 기능적으로 중복되는 측면을 지적하는 경향이 있다. 이와 관련하여 감사·감사위원회의 역할 및 기능에 대한 조정이 이루어지는 것이 원칙적으로 타당한 방안이 되겠지만, 이는 회사조직에 관한 기본법인 회사법의 소관사항이지 금융규제법의 소관사항이라고 할 수 없다. 그러나 금융회사의 건전성 확보를 위한 준법감시체제의 보완이라는 관점에서 금융규제법상 준법감시를 포함한 내부통제제도와 감사 및 감사위원회기능을 명확하게 조정하는 것은 필요할 것으로 본다. In general terms, the concept of financial regulation can be divided into external regulation and internal regulation. Internal regulation refers to a regulatory structure operated by financial institutions' internal control systems themselves, whereas external regulation is done by public authorities or self-regulatory organizations(SROs). Deregulation in the financial sector mainly denotes partial decrease of external regulation. However, in consideration of the economic role and potential risks of financial industry, financial deregulation cannot be an overall extinction of external regulation. Thus, deregulation of external regulation must be replaced with substantial increase of internal regulation or internal control system of financial institutions. Internal control as a part of internal regulation, differs from self-regulation which consists external regulatory system. As a substitution for external regulation, internal control composes internal regulatory system together with auditor or auditing committee. Auditor or auditing committee is also in charge of checking the adequacy of internal control system. However, internal control, as internalization of external regulation, is distinguished from auditor in that the latter mainly represents the interests of shareholders. Furthermore, compliance function is narrower than internal control in its scope in that the latter covers all other corporate risks as well as legal risks. Financial institutions also have risk management system to manage all types of financial and non-financial risks involving their businesses. Internal control also covers checking the relevance of risk management system and their operations. Practitioners in the financial sector are concerned with the overlapping or conflicting roles and functions of compliance officers(or internal control) and auditors. There should be legislative reform to solve this uncertainty.

국제적 전자송달에 관한 연구

김효정(Kim, Hyo Jung) 사법정책연구원 2021 사법정책연구원 연구총서 Vol.2021 No.7

국제소송에서는 재판상 문서의 송달에 소요되는 기간이 국내소송에 비하여 훨씬 장기간이므로 소송의 신속을 위하여 전자적 수단을 이용하여 국제송달을 함으로써 송달기간을 획기적으로 단축시킬 필요가 있다. 또한 국제소송에서 피고의 주소는 알 수 없으나 이메일 주소 등을 알고 있는 경우에는 이메일 계정으로 재판상 문서를 송달함으로써 소송이 원활하게 진행되도록 함과 동시에 추후 해당 재판의 승인·집행이 거부되지 않도록 할 필요가 있다. “민사 또는 상사의 재판상 및 재판외 문서의 회원국 간 송달에 관한 유럽연합 이사회 규칙 1393/2007[EU Council Regulation (EC) No. 1393/2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters, 유럽연합송달규칙]”의 2018년 개정안, “유럽소액소송규칙(European Small Claims Procedure Regulation)”, “만국우편협약(Universal Postal Convention)”을 비롯하여 미국, 영국, 호주, 캐나다 등 보통법 국가들은 재판상 문서의 국제적 전자송달을 인정하고 있다. 그러나 우리나라는 일본, 독일 등과 같이 재판상 문서의 국제적 전자송달을 명시적으로 허용하고 있지는 않다. 우리나라에서 실무상 국제적 전자송달의 실시가 어려운 이유는, 우리나라가 체결한 사법공조에 관한 양자조약이나 민사소송법 및 국제민사사법공조법상 전자적인 수단을 이용한 국제송달에 관하여 명시적인 규정이 없고, 우리나라가 “민사 또는 상사의 재판상 및 재판외 문서의 해외송달에 관한 협약(이하 ‘헤이그송달협약’이라고 한다)” 가입 시 헤이그송달협약 제10조a호 등에 대하여 유보선언을 하였기 때문이다. 본 연구는 우리나라에서의 현행 국제송달 체제 하에서 국제적 전자송달이 허용되는지 여부를 검토하고, 민·상사사건에서의 재판상 문서의 국제적 전자송달의 구체적인 도입 방안을 제시하는 것을 목적으로 한다. 이를 위하여 본 연구에서는 이메일과 보안전산망에 의한 국제송달을 도입하는 것이 적절하다고 판단하고, 그 제도적·기술적 도입 방안과 법적 도입방안을 각 검토하였다. In international litigation, the time length required for the service of judicial documents is ordinarily much longer than that of domestic litigation. So it is necessary to significantly shorten the service period by utilizing international service mechanism using electronic means in order to expedite the litigation. In addition, in the cross-border cases where the defendant’s domicile is unknown despite the e-mail address is identifiable, we need to explore some available and affordable service methods to ensure that the lawsuit would proceed smoothly and that the recognition and enforcement of the relevant judgment would not be refused in the subsequent phase by serving the judicial documents through e-mail account. The international e-service of judicial documents has currently been recognized in (ⅰ) 2018 proposal for amending “EU Council Regulation (EC) No. 1393/2007 on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (“EU Service Regulation”)”, (ⅱ) “European Small Claims Procedure Regulation”, (ⅲ) “Universal Postal Convention” as well as common law countries such as the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia and Canada. However, Korea does not explicitly allow international e-service of judicial documents like Japan and Germany. The reason for the difficulty to implement international e-service in the court’s practice in Korea is that there exist no explicit regulations on international service using electronic means under the bilateral treaties on judicial assistance concluded by Korea, or the Civil Procedure Act and the Act on International Judicial Mutual Assistance in Civil Matters. And further reason could be found in that Korea made a declaration pursuant to Article 10(a) of the “Convention on the Service Abroad of Judicial and Extrajudicial Documents in Civil or Commercial Matters (hereinafter “HCCH Service Convention”)” at the time of its accession.

국제법을 통한 감염병 통제 - 국제보건규칙의 이행과 준수를 중심으로 -

박진아 ( Jina Park ) 이화여자대학교 법학연구소 2019 法學論集 Vol.23 No.4

국제보건규칙은 인수공통감염병을 포함한 인간 감염병을 규율하는 대표적인 국제규범이자 감염병 통제를 제일의 목적으로 하는 유일한 국제규범이다. 개정된 국제보건규칙이 2007년 발효한 후 10여 년의 시간이 흘렀고, 이제 중요한 것은 당사국과 WHO가 국제보건규칙을 준수하고 이행하는 것이다. 이 글은 국제보건규칙이 형성한 감염병 통제의 잠재적 능력을 최대한 활용하기 위한 방안을 모색하는데 궁극적인 목적이 있다. 이를 위해 먼저 2005년 국제보건규칙이 개정되기까지의 감염병 통제를 위한 국제법의 발전과정과 개정된 국제보건규칙 관할 대상 질병을 살펴보고, 그 다음으로 개정된 국제보건규칙의 지난 10년간의 이행과 준수 과정에서 나타난 문제점과 한계를 분석하였다. 마지막으로 앞선 분석에 근거하여 이를 개선하기 위해 제시된 방안과 국제사회의 노력을 검토하였다. 국제보건규칙의 개정을 통해 WHO는 규범적 차원에서 감염병의 통제의 규범적 틀을 상당히 강화하였지만, WHO와 당사국의 적극적인 이행과 준수 없이는 규칙의 존재가 큰 의미가 없다. 국가들의 협력 없이는 감염병의 실효적 통제가 불가능하다는 것에 대한 국제적 공감대는 이미 오래전에 형성되었다. 국가들이 국제보건규칙에 따른 핵심 역량을 강화하고 기술 및 자금 지원에도 적극적으로 참여함과 동시에 WHO가 국제보건규칙의 관리자로서의 역할을 충실히 이행할 때 감염병의 효과적인 통제가 가능하다는 것을 다시 한 번 강조할 필요가 있다. The International Health Regulations are a representative international law for control of human infectious diseases including zoonosis, and the only international norm with the primary purpose of controlling infectious diseases. A decade after the revised International Health Regulations came into force in 2007, it is now important for parties including the WHO to comply with and implement these regulations. This article explores ways to make full use of the potential capabilities for the control of infectious diseases established by the International Health Regulations. To this purpose, this article examines the development of international law for the control of infectious diseases up to the revision of the 2005 International Health Regulations and reviews the diseases subject to the revised regulations. Next, the article analyzes the problems and limitations of implementation of and compliance with the International Health Regulations. Finally, based on the above analysis, this article reviews the proposed measures and the efforts of the international community to improve the regulations. Through the amendment of the International Health Regulations, the WHO has strengthened the normative framework for control of infectious diseases. However, without active implementation and compliance on the part of the WHO and State Parties, the existence of the rule is meaningless. The international consensus that effective control of infectious diseases is impossible without the cooperation of nations has already been formed. It is reaffirmed that countries can effectively control infectious diseases only when they work closely with the WHO, including active monitoring efforts implementing core competencies under the International Health Regulations and participating in technology and funding transfers. It is important to emphasize once again that effective control of infectious diseases is only possible when on the one hand States are actively monitoring infectious diseases by enforcing core capacities in accordance with the International Health Regulations and actively participating in technology sharing and funding, and when on the other hand the WHO cooperates closely with States and monitors implementation of the International Health Regulations as administrator.

친권 관계 사건의 국제재판관할 ―2019년 브뤼셀 II ter 규칙에 대한 소개를 중심으로―

현소혜 한국가족법학회 2021 가족법연구 Vol.35 No.2

There has been little discussion about the international jurisdiction rules to adjudicate in parental responsibility matters in Korea, although it is very important for the parties, for the welfare of their children and for the prevention of international child abduction. The draft amendment to the Act on Private International Law, which is currently pending before the National Assembly, introduces a new provision on international jurisdiction in parental responsibility matters, however it is not so satisfactory for the best interests of children. First, it can expose children to custody disputes repeatedly because the provision is designed to expand the possibility of international litigation concurrence. Second, it can make the appropriate hearing for children difficult because the courts having international jurisdiction over marital matters can also proceed with the related custody cases. In contrast, the EU Council Regulation 2019/1111 on Jurisdiction, the Recognition and Enforcement of Decisions in Matrimonial Matters and the Matters of Parental Responsibility and on International Child Abduction amended in 2019(Brussels II ter Regulation) repudiates the connection of the international jurisdiction rule for marital matters and for parental responsibility matters. This article is written for the introduction to the main amendments of Brussels II ter Regulation in this area and for the suggestion of the new international jurisdiction rules to adjudicate in parental responsibility matters in the viewpoint for the best interest of children.

감염병 예방 및 관리를 위한 국제규범체계에 관한 고찰

심영규(Young-Gyoo Shim) 한국해사법학회 2018 해사법연구 Vol.30 No.2

As of late, globalization has been affecting the legal system concerning prevention and management of infectious diseases, and the relevant legal system has been seeking various regulatory strategies. Due to the limits of World Health Organization(WHO)’s International Health Regulations (IHR) on systematic response and effective international cooperation, the other relevant international norms, such as international trade law, international human rights law and international environmental law have simultaneously worked on the common agenda of prevention and management of infection diseases. In this regard, the article begins by reviewing the sources of international law regarding prevention and management of infectious diseases (Chapter Ⅱ ); then reviews key provisions of the 「 IHR 2005 」 and Constitution of the WHO, which are general treaties in regulation against infectious diseases (Chapter Ⅲ ), then discusses the relationship between the 「 IHR 2005 」 and the other relevant international norms, WTO Agreements ( Ⅴ ) in particular, and in conclusion, analyzes and suggests a rule-harmonized approach for the mutual balance and complement between the 「 IHR 2005 」 and other relevant international laws. The 「 IHR 2005 」 , a principal international health law per se, is not a complete legal system, though it is highly regarded as an innovative approach sharply distinguished from past classical/conventional international health regime. Accordingly, it undoubtedly needs to review the relationship between 「 IHR 2005 」 and other relevant international laws in order to increase 「 IHR 2005 」 ’s legal completeness and synergism between the two. In this respect, it should be noted that new notion of human security has recently emerged, extending the boundaries of traditional notion of security and emphasizing protection of individuals, such as from spread of infectious diseases, rather than State itself. Consequently, in the author’s opinion, the introduction of the notion of human security with an important global health security component will be a legally necessary approach to not only compensate the defect but also increase the legal completeness of the 「 IHR 2005 」 . In addition, such approach will be a legally effective method to secure a legal basis for cooperation and collective response of the international community. In conclusion, with regards to the issues of infectious diseases’ international spread and their prevention and management, the 「 IHR 2005 」 and other relevant international laws should be interpreted and applied based on the notion of global health security, an approach that can partly contribute to refining 「 IHR 2005 」 ’s imperfections. Furthermore, this approach will be compatible with the implementation and interpretation principles of the 「 IHR 2005 」 , as well as with the ‘primacy of the obligations under the Charter of the United Nations’. 오늘날 세계화의 진전은 감염병의 예방ㆍ관리에 관한 국제규범체계에 대해서도 많은 영향을 미치고 있으며 관련 국제규범 역시 이에 대응하여 다양한 변화를 모색하고 있다. 특히, 초국경적 성격의 감염병의 예방 및 관리에 관한 문제는 세계보건기구 (WHO)의 「국제보건규칙」 (International Health Regulations: IHR) 뿐만 아니라 WTO 협정체제를 중심으로 하는 국제통상법을 비롯하여, 기타 국제인권법, 다자간환경협약 (MEAs) 등 다양한 영역의 국제법에서 주요 공통의제로 다루어지고 있다. 이는 WHO와 「국제보건규칙」(IHR) 만으로는 여전히 감염병의 예방ㆍ관리에 관한 체계적 대응과 효과적인 국제공조에는 한계가 있을 수밖에 없기 때문이라고 할 것이다 . 이런 상황에서 본 논문은 감염병의 예방ㆍ관리에 관한 일반조약인 「국제보건규칙」(IHR)을 중심으로 그와 밀접한 연관 관계에 있는 여타 국제협정들, 특히 WTO 협정체제와의 상호관계에 대한 논의를 통해 감염병의 예방ㆍ관리 및 감시ㆍ감독에 관한 국제규범체계의 복합성과 다양성에 대한 이해를 도모하고, 관련 국제규범 상호간의 조화를 도모하기 위한 ‘규범조화적 ’(rule-harmonized) 접근방식을 제시하는데 초점을 두고자 하였다. 현재 감염병의 예방ㆍ관리 문제를 직접적으로 규율하고 있는 가장 중요한 국제실정법규는「2005년 국제보건규칙」(IHR 2005)이며, 그밖에도 감염병의 예방ㆍ관리를 위한 WHO의 입법권능을 명시하고 있는「WHO 헌장」 역시 주요 국제실정법규 중의 하나로 거론되고 있다. 「IHR 2005」는 이전 버전인 「IHR 1969」와 비교하여 여러 면에서 차별적이고 혁신적인 것으로 평가받고 있다. 그럼에도 불구하고 「HR 2005」는 여전히 규범적으로 본질적인 한계를 내포하고 있으며, 현실적인 적용 측면에서도 여러 문제점을 노출하고 있는 등 완성된 규범체계라고 할 수 없어 향후 정비ㆍ개선을 통한 보완의 필요성이 끊임없이 지적되고 있다. 이처럼 현재 미완성 규범체계로 머물러 있는 「IHR 2005」의 한계와 문제점을 극복하기 위해서는 향후 「IHR 2005」 자체에 대한 지속적인 정비ㆍ개선뿐만 아니라 여타 관련 국제법 분야와의 상호 조화와 보완 을 통해 감염병의 예방 및 관리에 관한 국제규범체계의 완성도를 높이고 관련 국제협정들 상호간의 시너지 효과를 높이는 것도 중요한 과제라고 할 것이다. 「IHR 2005」와 여타 관련 국제협정들과의 관계에 대한 재조명이 필요한 이유이다. 이런 점에서 국제법상 국가 자체의 안보를 중시하는 전통적인 안보 관념을 확장하여 근래 개별 인간에 중심을 둔, 새로운 인간안보 (human security) 관념의 등장과 발전은 주목할 만 하다고 할 것이다. 감염병의 발생ㆍ확산은 이제 더 이상 일정 영역 내 국가적ㆍ지역적 차원의 단순한 보건 이슈가 아닌, 경우에 따라서는 국제평화와 안전에 대한 중대한 위협이 되고 있기 때문이다. 이처럼 오늘날 감염병의 발생ㆍ확산이 국제법상 국제평화와 안전에 대한 위협을 구성한다는 관념은 감염병의 예방ㆍ관리에 관한 문제에 있어서 「IHR 2005」와 WTO 협정체제 등 여타 관련 국제협정들을 글로벌 보건안보 관점에서 서로 조화롭고 통합적으로 해석ㆍ적용하는 것을 가능하게 함으로써 「IHR 2005」와 여타 관련 국제협정들 간의 충둘ㆍ갈등 가능성을 최소화하는 동시에「IHR 2005」의 불완전성을 어느 정도 보완하는데 기여할 수 있을 것이다. 이러한 ‘규범조화적 ’(rule-harmonized) 접근방식은「IHR 2005」를 이행함에 있어서 「UN 헌장」과 「WHO헌장」을 따라야 한다는 원칙, 「IHR 2005」와 기타 관련 국제협정은 상호 합치되게 (양립되게: compatible) 해석되어야 한다는 원칙, 「UN 헌장」상 의무 우선의 원칙에도 모두 부합하는 합리적인 접근방식이라 할 것이다.

아웃도어 의류를 이용한 소비 자기조절초점 척도의 개발에 관한 연구

박성용(Park, Seong Yong),나준희(Na, June-Hee),이용기(Lee, Yong-Ki) 한국문화산업학회 2013 문화산업연구 Vol.13 No.4

자기조절초점의 구성요인인 향상초점과 예방초점은 조절요인 또는 직접적으로 소비자만족에 영향을 미치는 주요 요인으로 작동된다. 목표를 달성하려는 동기요인으로서 자기조절초점에 대한 많은 연구는 대부분 성격과 관련된 자기조절초점척도를 사용하고 있다. 그러나 아웃도어의류의 선택과 같이, 소비선택과 관련된 목표지향적인 행동을 과연 성격적인 측면에서의 자기조절초점척도가 얼마나 설명할 수 있는가에 대한 의문점을 갖게 된다. 이러한 의문점을 해결하기 위하여 본 연구에서는 소비자의 쇼핑 측면과 관련된 자기조절초점척도를 개발하여 성격조절초점 척도와 비교?분석하고자 한다. 소비관련 자기조절초점 척도 문항은 소비자구매행동과정이론을 이용하여 구매 전, 구매 시, 구매 후 과정과 소비관련 개인적인 특성을 이용하여 47 항목이 개발되었으며, 판별분석과 요인분석을 통해 정제하여 내적 일관성을 높이는 과정을 거쳤다. 또한, 성격적인 자기조절초점과 비교하여 내적 일관성에서 어떠한 차이가 존재하고, 성격자기조절초점과 어떤 관련성이 있는 가를 고찰하였다. 이러한 척도개발 및 관련성을 고찰하기 위하여 최근의 문화적 트렌드를 반영하는 아웃도어의류가 이용되었다. 연구 결과, 소비자기조절초점은 향상초점과 예방초점으로 구분되지만, 이들의 신뢰도는 성격자기조절초점의 신뢰도에 비해 상대적으로 낮음을 보여주고 있다. 그리고 성격자기조절초점과 소비자기조절초점의 관련성은 존재하지만 강한 것은 아닌 것으로 나타났다. 또한, 신뢰도를 높이기 위해서 요인분석을 사용한 소비자기조절초점의 개발은 향상초점과 예방초점의 분명한 차이를 보여주지 못할 뿐만 아니라 다차원적인 측면을 포함하는 문제점이 존재함을 보여주었다. Self-regulation plays an important role as a moderating variable in explaining the motivation toward goal-achieving activities or it sometimes affects consumer satisfaction directly. Self-regulation scale for the most research studies reflects the aspects of individual differences as personality. However, it is questionable whether the scale could be used in explaining the motivation mechanism for shopping environment or consumption. Self-regulation scale may explain some aspects but we can infer that it does not reflect the dynamic aspects of shopping. Accordingly, we develop consumption-shopping related self-regulation scale for promotion-focused and prevention-focused regulation. In order to develop scale, we employ the consumer decision making process which emphasizes pre-purchase, purchase, post-purchase process as well as individual characteristic differences. We developed 47 items and refined those items to increase internal consistency using discriminant analysis and factor analysis. Furthermore, we considered the differences in scales in personality-based vs. consumption-based scale in which we developed in terms of internal consistency of scales. Outdoor cloth is used to consider the development of scales and relationships between personality-based and consumption-based scale to reflect the recent trend in culture. Research results show that consumption-based scale has promotion and prevention focus but it has a lower internal consistency than personality-based scale has. Personality-based scale and consumption-based scale has some relations in terms of correlation. Also, consumption-based scale using factor analysis to increase internal consistency produce rather fails to show clear differences between promotion and prevention, and it has multi-dimensional aspects too. 자기조절초점의 구성요인인 향상초점과 예방초점은 조절요인 또는 직접적으로 소비자만족에 영향을 미치는 주요 요인으로 작동된다. 목표를 달성하려는 동기요인으로서 자기조절초점에 대한 많은 연구는 대부분 성격과 관련된 자기조절초점척도를 사용하고 있다. 그러나 아웃도어의류의 선택과 같이, 소비선택과 관련된 목표지향적인 행동을 과연 성격적인 측면에서의 자기조절초점척도가 얼마나 설명할 수 있는가에 대한 의문점을 갖게 된다. 이러한 의문점을 해결하기 위하여 본 연구에서는 소비자의 쇼핑 측면과 관련된 자기조절초점척도를 개발하여 성격조절초점 척도와 비교?분석하고자 한다. 소비관련 자기조절초점 척도 문항은 소비자구매행동과정이론을 이용하여 구매 전, 구매 시, 구매 후 과정과 소비관련 개인적인 특성을 이용하여 47 항목이 개발되었으며, 판별분석과 요인분석을 통해 정제하여 내적 일관성을 높이는 과정을 거쳤다. 또한, 성격적인 자기조절초점과 비교하여 내적 일관성에서 어떠한 차이가 존재하고, 성격자기조절초점과 어떤 관련성이 있는 가를 고찰하였다. 이러한 척도개발 및 관련성을 고찰하기 위하여 최근의 문화적 트렌드를 반영하는 아웃도어의류가 이용되었다. 연구 결과, 소비자기조절초점은 향상초점과 예방초점으로 구분되지만, 이들의 신뢰도는 성격자기조절초점의 신뢰도에 비해 상대적으로 낮음을 보여주고 있다. 그리고 성격자기조절초점과 소비자기조절초점의 관련성은 존재하지만 강한 것은 아닌 것으로 나타났다. 또한, 신뢰도를 높이기 위해서 요인분석을 사용한 소비자기조절초점의 개발은 향상초점과 예방초점의 분명한 차이를 보여주지 못할 뿐만 아니라 다차원적인 측면을 포함하는 문제점이 존재함을 보여주었다. Self-regulation plays an important role as a moderating variable in explaining the motivation toward goal-achieving activities or it sometimes affects consumer satisfaction directly. Self-regulation scale for the most research studies reflects the aspects of individual differences as personality. However, it is questionable whether the scale could be used in explaining the motivation mechanism for shopping environment or consumption. Self-regulation scale may explain some aspects but we can infer that it does not reflect the dynamic aspects of shopping. Accordingly, we develop consumption-shopping related self-regulation scale for promotion-focused and prevention-focused regulation. In order to develop scale, we employ the consumer decision making process which emphasizes pre-purchase, purchase, post-purchase process as well as individual characteristic differences. We developed 47 items and refined those items to increase internal consistency using discriminant analysis and factor analysis. Furthermore, we considered the differences in scales in personality-based vs. consumption-based scale in which we developed in terms of internal consistency of scales. Outdoor cloth is used to consider the development of scales and relationships between personality-based and consumption-based scale to reflect the recent trend in culture. Research results show that consumption-based scale has promotion and prevention focus but it has a lower internal consistency than personality-based scale has. Personality-based scale and consumption-based scale has some relations in terms of correlation. Also, consumption-based scale using factor analysis to increase internal consistency produce rather fails to show clear differences between promotion and prevention, and it has multi-dimensional aspects too.

국제점령법'체계에서 1907년 헤이그 육전규칙 제43조의 실효성

이기범(Lee Ki Beom) 국제법평론회 2014 국제법평론 Vol.0 No.40

Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations has been regarded as the most important provision in the international law of occupation. It articulates that the occupant "shall take all the measures in his power to restore, and ensure, as far as possible, public order and civil life, while respecting, unless absolutely prevented, the laws in force" in the occupied territory. According to Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations, there are two obligations imposed on the occupant (or the occupying power): the obligation to restore and ensure public order and civil life, and the obligation to respect local legislation in force in the occupied territory. However, there has been much controversy, over the last 100 years, on how to interpret Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations. It is also likely that the tension between the two obligations has led to the weakening of the normativity or effectiveness of Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations in some cases of international armed conflicts. Moreover, the adoption of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, the development of international human rights law and the existence of the resolutions of the Security Council of the United Nations (UNSC) have refrained from fully discharging the obligation to respect local legislation in force dictated by Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations. Although the effectiveness of Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations seems to be reduced, it is, however, noted that the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, international human rights law and the resolutions of the UNSC do not replace but 'complement' Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations. It is also dubious whether the concept of International Territorial Administration (ITA) may exclude the application of Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations, because ITA can be regarded as an example of occupation. Therefore, there still exists the limitation on the competence of the occupant or the occupying power to modify or suspend local legislation in the occupied territory. Since the Second World War, the structure of the international law of occupation has become somewhat complicated because of the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention, international human rights law and the actions of the UNSC. However, Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations is still the most important provision in the international law of occupation, because there is no customary international law to replace the provision. Therefore, in the case of occupation, Article 43 of the 1907 Hague Regulations should be the starting-point for discussing or solving occupation-related problems.

생성형 인공지능(AI) 규제원칙에 관한 연구

이성엽 고려대학교 법학연구원 2023 고려법학 Vol.- No.110

In November of last year, 8 years after AI AlphaGo created a sensation by beating 9th dan Lee Se-dol completely at badulk in 2015, ChatGPT, an interactive artificial intelligence, appeared, shocking the world once again. With the advent of ChatGPT, humans are starting to discuss AI regulations in earnest, believing that the dangers of robots and artificial intelligence, which have only been seen in movies, will become a reality. Prior to the release of generative AI, the prevailing opinion was that AI ethics should be strengthened. Afterwards, when generative AI is released and the prospect that it will be a game changer prevails, major countries such as the EU, the US, and Korea are starting legal discussions on generative AI. While the EU is in the process of legislating first, the US and Korea have also prepared legislative bills and are discussing them in the National Assembly. However, it is important to understand the characteristics of generative AI and set the direction of regulation before the full-scale introduction of legal regulations. In general, new technology regulation can derive four standards or principles: content or characteristics of technology, timing and region of regulation, risk and reward according to regulation, step-by-step and comprehensive approach, and guarantee of professional and democratic participation. Generative AI has tremendous potential for innovation in that it can generate original and creative content, not only text, but also images, music, and even computer code, using provided data. It is difficult to regulate because it is difficult to predict the development direction or impact of generative AI technology, but considering the risks, it is also difficult to choose not to regulate at all. In the direction of regulation, it is important to consider the principle of proportional regulation considering principle-based regulation, negative regulation, harmonization of domestic and international regulation, and risk-based regulation.

혼인관계사건의 국제재판관할에 관한 입법적 제안과 유럽재판소 및 독일 판례의 시사점

이승미(Lee, Sung-mi) 한국국제사법학회 2015 國際私法硏究 Vol.21 No.1

국제적 혼인관계가 우리 사회에 일상적인 현상으로 자리한 지도 상당한 시일이 지났다. 그와 함께 외국적 요소를 지닌 가사사건의 발생도 잦아졌다. 대표적 사건이 국제이혼이다. 국제이혼사건에서 어느 국가의 법원이 사안을 판단하느냐에 관한 국제재판관할의 문제는 지리적 거리와 소송에 사용되는 언어뿐 아니라, 사건에 적용될 절차규범과 실질규범의 결정에도 중요하다. 나아가 혼인관계사건에서의 국제재한관할은 계약이나 조약, 일반적으로 승인되는 국제법상의 원칙으로 해결하지 못하고, 당사자가 그 청구에 당면한 후에야 고려하게 되는 특성이 있다. 따라서 혼인관계사건의 국제재판관할에 관한 규정은 당사자가 절차와 그에 따른 결과를 쉽게 예견할 수 있도록 명확하고 구체적이어야 한다. 그럼에도 불구하고 「국제사법」 제2조만이 국제재판관할에 관한 일반원칙으로서 존재할 뿐이고, 혼인관계사건의 국제재판관할에 관한 명확하고 구체적인 규정은 존재하지 않는다. 본고는 혼인관계사건의 국제재판관할을 위한 명확하고 구체적인 규정을 도출하는 데 목적이 있다. 이를 위하여 EU의 「Brussels II bis 규칙」과 「독일 가사비송법」을 소개하고, 분석한다. 그 다음으로 유럽재판소와 독일 법원의 판례를 통하여 혼인관계사건의 국제재판관할 규정의 입법 이후를 전망하기로 한다. The international marriages have been a common aspect in korean society already for a long time. The conflicts in family affairs with foreign elements today happen queit more frequently in comparison with the past. A typical kind of these conflicts is the international divorce. In reference to the international divorce the international jurisdiction is a important issue. Because it is decided according to the regulations of the international jurisdiction which country have a right to judge a case of the family affairs with foreign elements. Not only the geographical distance and the language in court but the procedural law and the substantive law are also decided according to the international jurisdiction. In addition the international jurisdiction in family affairs with foreign elements have a distinctive feature that it is considered first after a litigation, because it can be not solved mostly with a contract, a international convention or a customary international law. The legal provisions about the international jurisdiction should be clear and detailed with this reason, so that the parties could understand and foresee the process and the consequences easily. However the korean international private law has only one provision, Art. 2, as a general rule about the international jurisdiction without clear and detailed provisions for the family affairs with foreign elements. This Article have a intent to extract clear and detailed provisions for the international jurisdiction in the matrimonial conflicts like international divorce. For this ‘the Brussels II bis regulation’ of EU and ‘the german FamFG(the law for the litigation in family affairs and in affairs of the jurisdiction over non-contentious matters)’ are introduced and analyzed. After that the legal issues after the legislation about the international jurisdiction in family affairs with foreign elements are previewed with judgments of European Court of Justice and german courts.