미국 연방법원의 재판권

정영환(CHUNG YOUNG-HWAN) 한국법학원 2016 저스티스 Vol.- No.157

본고는 ‘미국 연방법원의 재판권 - 재판제도/재판권/연방문제재판권을 중심으로 -’라는 제목으로 미국의 재판제도 일반과 미국 연방법원의 재판권 일반 및 연방법원의 물적 재판권 중 연방문제재판권을 중심으로 살펴보았다. 미국 연방법원의 재판권을 이해하기 위하여 먼저 미국의 재판제도 일반을 보았다. 연방 재판제도의 목적과 당사자주의(the adversary system)을 본 후에 연방과 주(州)의 재판제도와 판사의 임명 등에 관하여 살펴보았다. 다음으로 미국 연방법원의 재판권 일반에 관하여 보았다. 연방법원의 재판권은 크게 물적 재판권(Subject Matter Jurisdiction)과 인적 재판권(Personal Jurisdiction)으로 나뉜다. 물적 재판권은 다시 ‘연방문제재판권(Federal Question Jurisdiction)’, ‘주(州)가 다른 주민 사이의 소송에 있어서 재판권(Diversity Jurisdiction)’과 ‘관련재판권(Supplemental Jurisdiction)’ 등으로 나눌 수 있다. 인적 재판권에 있어서는 개인의 주소지(domicile), 회사의 설립지 또는 사업근거지, 특별한 입법에 의한 경우(Long-Arm Statutes), 최소한의 접촉이론(Minimum Contacts) 등 다양한 재판권의 원인이 되는 문제들이 논의된다. 연방법원의 재판권 일반에서는 연방법원의 재판권에 관한 종류 및 개념에 대하여 개괄적으로 설명하였다. 그 이후 연방법원의 물적재판권 중 하나인 연방문제재판권을 구체적으로 검토하였다. 연방문제재판권은 연방헌법 제3조 제2항, 28 U.S.C. 제1331조에 규정되어 있다. 여기에서 해석상 문제되는 것은 ‘연방법 하에서 발생하는(arising under federal law)...’ 것의 의미, 그것의 헌법적 한계, 판례에 기초하여 정립된 ‘소장 자체에 잘 주장되어야 한다는 원칙(The Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule)’과 그 이후의 구체적 적용에 관하여 연방대법원의 판례를 중심으로 검토하였다. 마지막으로 미국 연방법원의 재판권에 관한 논의가 우리나라 재판권제도에 대하여 어떤 의미를 갖는지 살펴보았다. Under the title of ‘Jurisdiction of the U.S. Federal Courts’, this article introduces overall court proceedings in the U.S.; jurisdiction of the U.S. Federal Courts; and Subject Matter Jurisdiction in the U.S. Federal Court, specifically about Federal Question Jurisdiction. To understand jurisdiction of the U.S. Federal Courts, one needs to know about overall court proceedings in the U.S. As an effort to explain about the court system general, this article introduces purposes of the U.S. federal civil procedure and its adversary system. Then, it further explains about court proceedings of the state courts and federal courts, and about how judges are appointed in each court system. After providing such explanation of the U.S. court system, this article deals with jurisdiction of the U.S. Federal Courts, dividing it into two categories: Subject Matter Jurisdiction and Personal Jurisdiction. With respect to Subject Matter Jurisdiction, this article describes how Federal Question Jurisdiction, Diversity Jurisdiction, and Supplemental Jurisdiction play out. For Personal Jurisdiction, this article examines various issues related to basis of personal jurisdiction, such as, domicile, corporation’s place of establishment or place of principal office, Long-Arm Statutes, and Minimum Contacts. By touching these issues, this article aims at providing general understanding of types and concepts of jurisdiction of federal courts. After that, this article examines more specifically about Federal Question Jurisdiction, which is one type of the Subject Matter Jurisdiction, and regulated by U.S. Constitution Article 3 Section 2 and 28 U.S.C. Section 1331. Regarding interpretation of such rules, two issues have been raised: meaning and Constitutionality of the language, “arising under federal law,” and development and application of “the Well-Pleaded Complaint Rule.” This article reviews these issues through analysis of U.S. Supreme Court cases. Lastly, this article analyzed what implications discussion on jurisdiction of U.S. Federal Courts has for Korean jurisdiction system.

154㎸급 인텔리전트 변전소 구축 (pp.33-35)

정영환(Y.H. Chung),양대일(D.I. Yang),김정배(J.B. Kim),송원표(W.P. Song),최인혁(I.H. Choi),김정호(J.H. Kim),이동일(D.I. Lee) 대한전기학회 2005 대한전기학회 학술대회 논문집 Vol.2005 No.7

조선나전의 변천과 일본에 미친 영향

정영환(Chung, Young Hwan),전해운( Jeon, Hae Un ) 한국조형디자인학회 2008 조형디자인연구 Vol.11 No.4

Within the Korean peninsula, perhaps the most ancient ottchil artifact is ottchil sculptures from a stone coffin dating back to 4th century BCE, excavated in Namseong-li Village of Asan County, Chungcheongnam-do Province. Numerous tomb artifacts excavated in Changwon’s Daho-ri Village, Gobum County, are estimated to extend back to 1st century BCE. The excavation of the royal tomb of King Mu-nyeong of Baekje Dynasty produced ottchil headrest, footrest, and coffin, as part of the king and queen’s burial objects. Turtle shell and flower metallic designs covering black and red wood-based ottchil craft and gold-overlaid sculpture of a phoenix exemplifythe excellence of Baekje Dynasty’s ottchil craftsmanship. Numerous and eclectic fragments of ottchil craft excavated at Geumnyeong, Geumgwan, Cheonma, and other major burial sites of Silla era provide glimpses of bloom of ottchil craft during that era. From the site of Anapji royal auxiliary palace of Unified Silla were discovered over 30,000 of whole artifacts and fragments, many of which included ottchil artifacts. These fragments included remnants of what may have been mother-of-pearl inlay ("najeon") ottchil ware. Rather, the remnants exemplified ‘even-out’technique, in which ottchil coats were applied over a surface bearing silver ornamentation to level the surface for a smooth finish. With obvious differencesin the materials used in the ottchil craft, najeon ottchil craft was not found at the Anapji site. However, najeon ottchil craft attributed to the 8th century was discovered at a burial mound of Gaya Confederacy. At the same time, however, excellence and bloom of Goryeo najeon ottchil can be surmised by examining historical records such as Goryeo King Mun-jong’s presenting of najeon ottchil ware as gifts to the royal palace of China’s Liao Dynasty in the 11th century and travelogues of Xujing, emissary during Song Dynasty, extolling the art craft, and by examining ample holdings of Goryeo najeon ottchil ware in museums in the United States, Japan, and other countries. The 11th century gave birth to a new form of ottchil art, using idiosyncratic technique and materials, that we know as Goryeo najeon ottchil ware. The 14th century gave rise to the Joseon Dynasty and a new field of arts and crafts that distinctly contrasted with those of the Goryeo era. Differences of najeon ottchil ware between the two eras were obvious however, techniques and designs of the Goryeo era underwent succession, adaptation, and evolution into a new genre of najeon ottchil, befitting the social culture of Joseon Dynasty. For thousands of years, ottchil art culture has been evolving in various countries under distinct cultural idiosyncrasies, and in Korea, it evolved into a unique art culture renowned as najeon ottchil ware. In China, their lacquerware evolved into ‘engraving’while in Japan, it became ‘floral design’ lacquerware. Undoubtedly, Korean najeon ottchil craft is unique and contrasts strongly with crafts from other countries. In this research, evolution of techniquesand designs of Joseon najeon ottchil ware was studied by analyzing artifacts, and, at the same, this research investigatedhow Joseon najeon ottchil culture, which was more ahead its time than those of Japan, nfluenced the seminal stages of Japanese lacquerware culture. In this research, succession and advancement of techniquesand designs, in the context of the historical tides of both countries, were explored. Also, in this research, the original form of najeon ottchil transferred to Japan and its subsequent adaptation within the Japanese culture was delineated. Finally, this research served as an important opportunity to reexamine the influence of Joseon najeon ottchil craft upon the historical development of Japanese lacquerware culture.

HVDC 차단기 필요성과 연구개발 동향

정영환(Young-Hwan Chung),황휘동(Hwi-Dong Hwang),김병철(Byoung-Choul Kim) 대한전기학회 2015 대한전기학회 학술대회 논문집 Vol.2015 No.7

근거리 송전선에서의 무투입저항 가스절연개폐장치 개폐과전압에 관한 연구

정영환(Young-Hwan Chung),김진호(Jin-Ho Kim) 대한전기학회 2013 대한전기학회 학술대회 논문집 Vol.2013 No.4

우리 민사소송법(民事訴訟法)의 연혁(沿革)에 관하여

정영환 ( Young Hwan Chung ) 고려대학교 법학연구원 2009 고려법학 Vol.0 No.53

The main purpose of this article is to recognize precisely the past and current status of Korean civil procedure by reviewing the history of it. It is because by doing so the future direction of Korean civil procedure can be estimated precisely. This article divides the history of Korean civil procedure into two parts, before the modern era and after the modern era. The explanation of the former is performed simply abstracting whole period into one part due to the lack of research of the history of legislation. The explanation of the latter is performed dividing it into five periods, i) the period from the Gabo Reform of 1894 to Japan-Korea Annexation (1894-1910), ii) the period from the Japan-Korea Annexation to the Korea`s restoration of independence (1910-1945), iii) the period from the Korea`s restoration of independence to the enactment of the former Korean Civil Procedure Act (1945-1960), iv) the period of the former Korean Civil Procedure Act (1960-2002), and v) the period of the new Korean Civil Procedure Act (2002-present). This article reviews the process and contents of the amendment of the Korean civil procedure, especially focusing on the period after the enactment of the first Korean Civil Procedure Act of 1960. In the period of the former Korean Civil Procedure Act the base of Korea`s own civil procedure had been prepared, and in the period of the new Korean Civil Procedure Act was the developing era when the frame of Korea`s own civil procedure had been equipped. Specifically, the Article 1 of the new Korean Civil Procedure declaring the ideal of the civil procedure and the principle of good faith and arranging the basic frame of the Korean civil procedure, and the efforts to selectively adopt foreign civil procedure such as the U.S. civil procedure, the German civil procedure, and the Japanese civil procedure suitable to Korean circumstance have significant meaning.

고려법학 106년 회고 및 전망 -민사소송법의 관점에서-

정영환 ( Young Hwan Chung ) 고려대학교 법학연구원 2013 고려법학 Vol.0 No.68

본 논문은 고려법학 106년 회고 및 전망이라는 제목으로 민사소송법의 입장에서 서술하고 있다. 고려법학(Korea Law Review)의 뿌리는 보성전문학교(Bosung University) 당시인 1907년 법정학계(Bosung Law Review)에 뿌리를 두고 있다. 논문의 내용은 고려법학의 학문적 업적은 보성전문학교와 고려대학교의 전임교수가 쓴 글이 주축을 이루고 있기 때문에 1905년 이후의 보성전문학교와 고려대학교의 교수진을 살펴본 후에 고려법학에 게재된 논문의 내용을 간단히 본다. 논문 중 1908년에 법정학계에 게재된 논문 2편은 민사소송법의 법제사적인 측면에서 중요한 의미를 갖는 것으로 생각되어 원문을 중심으로 그 내용을 구체적으로 살펴보았다. 이것으로 고려법학의 106년을 나름대로 회고하였다. 이러한 기초 위에 고려법학의 향후 발전방향을 간단히 제시함으로써 그 전망에 갈음하고 있다. Under the title “Retrospecting one hundred and six years of Korea Law Review and prospecting its future”, this article is describing the retrospect and prospect of the journal from the perspective of civil procedure. Korea Law Review has roots in Bosung Law Review that was first published in 1907, by “Bosung University”, the former self of Korea University. Because academic values of Korea Law Review have been established by faculty members of Bosung University and Korea University, this article first examines faculty members of the two universities; then it briefly looks through contents of the scholarly articles published in Korea Law Review. This article reviews contents of two articles more thoroughly that were published in Bosung Law Review in 1908, because they are thought to have important meaning in terms of legal history of Korean civil procedure. Likewise, this article looks back one hundred and six years of Korea law Review. Based on the retrospect, this article briefly suggests possible directions of future development of the journal in lieu of the prospect of it.

우리 사법시스템에 대한 새로운 고찰

정영환(Chung Young Hwan) 한국법학원 2015 저스티스 Vol.- No.146_2

우리나라의 근대적 사법시스템은 조선왕조 시대인 1895년 3월 25일 제정된 “재판소구성법”으로부터 시작되었다. 그 이후 대한제국 당시인 1907년 12월 27일에 새롭게 제정된 “재판소구성법”을 거쳐, 일제 식민지 시절에는 일본 사법시스템에 기초하여 운영되다가, 1945년 8월 15일 해방이 되면서 잠시 미군정을 거치게 되었다. 그러나 현재의 사법시스템은 1948년 7월 17일 제정?시행된 대한민국 헌법에 기초하여 1949년 9월 26일 법률 제51호로 “법원조직법”이 제정?공포되면서 현재에 이루고 있다. 지금 근대적 사법시스템이 도입되어 시행되어 온지도 약 120년 정도 흘렀다. 이러한 시점에 우리 사법시스템에 대한 진지한 고찰을 통하여 향후 우리 사법시스템이 나아갈 이정표를 정하는 것이 무엇보다 중요하다고 생각된다. 현재 우리의 사법시스템은 법원조직법의 규정에 기초하는 것이지만 사법시스템을 구성하는 인적?물적 요소의 변화를 살펴볼 필요가 있다. 본 논문에서는 향후 우리 사법시스템에 중요한 변화를 가져올 3가지 주제를 다룬다. 첫째로는 2010년부터 시작된 전자소송에 관한 것이다. 전자소송이란 사법시스템의 모든 운영형태가 종이가 아닌 전자기기를 통하여 이루어지는 것을 의미한다. 이것은 우리 사법시스템의 운영에 중대한 변화를 가지고 올 것이다. 소장 등 각종 문서 및 증거의 제출, 기일의 통지, 기록의 관리, 재판의 심리, 판결의 선고 및 판결서의 송달 등 모든 부분에 변화가 예상된다. 특히 재판의 심리에 있어서 전자소송은 매우 유용한 수단이 될 수 있고, 구술을 통한 법정에서의 심리를 충실하게 할 수 있게 된다. 이러한 상황에서 판결서 작성의 부담을 줄이는 방향으로 우리 사법시스템을 개선할 필요가 있다. 둘째로는 사법시스템의 인적 구성요소의 변화에 관한 것이다. 2009년부터 로스쿨제도가 도입되면서 사법시스템의 근간이 되는 법조인의 양성이 종전 사법시험과 사법연수원 교육을 통하여 이루어지던 것이 로스쿨 교육과 변호사시험 제도로 바뀌어 가고 있다. 로스쿨을 통한 법조 인력의 양성은 다양한 대학 교육을 받은 사람들이 법조인으로 유입되어 법의 지배의 확대에 기여하지만, 법조 인력의 증가에 따른 법조시장의 경쟁이 치열하여질 것이라는 비판도 있다. 그러나 우리 사법시스템의 운영에 있어서 다양하고 종전보다 많은 수의 법률가들을 적극적으로 활용하는 방안을 강구할 필요가 있다. 이것은 법률시장의 확대와 법률회사의 국제 경쟁력과 관련이 있을 뿐만아니라 우리나라의 분쟁해결과정에 변호사의 역할을 강화하는 것과 직결되는 것이다. 따라서 로스쿨도입에 따른 법조 인력의 수적인 증가를 사법시스템 운영에 긍정적으로 작용할 수 있도록 미국의 디스커버리(Discovery) 제도의 취지를 살릴 수 있는 자료수집에 변호사들의 역할을 강화하는 제도의 개발, 독일의 변호사 화해제도 등의 도입을 고려할 필요가 있다. 셋째로는 우리 사법시스템의 분쟁해결 과정에 있어서 대법원의 역할을 재검토할 필요성이 있다. 현재 우리 대법원의 사건이 1년에 36,000 건 정도에 이르러 대법원의 업무 폭주로 인하여 대법원이 최고법원으로서의 법령해석의 통일이라는 기능을 상실할 지경에 이르렀다. 분쟁해결의 흐름이라는 측면에서 보면 분쟁의 최종 단계인 대법원에서 빨간 불이 켜진 상태이다. 이것은 우리나라 사법시스템 전체에 중대한 장애요소가 발생한 것이다. 이러한 시점에 대법원이 제안하고 있는 상고심법원안의 타당성 여부를 우리 사법시스템에 있어서 상고제도의 변천과 관련하여 검토해 보았다. 대법원의 상고심법원 안은 대법원이 구체적인 권리구제 보다는 우리나라의 법령해석의 통일이라는 기능에 집중하면서도, 분쟁해결의 흐름을 정상화할 수 있다는 점에서 긍정적이라 평가된다. Modern judicial system of Korea started from the “Court Formation Act” enacted on March 25, 1895 when Cho-Sun Dynasty was ruling. Since then, Korean judicial system had been managed by the “Court Formation Act” was newly enacted on December 27, 1907, in the era of Korean Empire, and by Japanese judicial system in the era of Japanese colonization. After independence of Korea on August 15, 1945, Korea was under temporary control of the US Army Military Government in Korea. However, current Korean judicial system has its basis on “Court Organization Act” enacted and announced on September 26, 1949, as the Act No. 51, which was based on Korean Constitution enacted and implemented on July 17, 1948. Likewise, approximately 120 years has passed since adoption and implementation of modern judicial system. At this point, it is more important than anything else to set up road map of Korean judicial system through serious consideration of the system. Although current judicial system is based on the Court Organization Act, changes in human and material resources that consist of judicial system should be reviewed. This article is about three themes that can bring fundamental changes in Korean judicial system. The first one is e-litigation started since 2010. E-litigation means a litigation system managed not by paper records but by electric records and equipments. This new system will bring fundamental changes in Korean judicial system in all aspects including submission of documents including complaint and of evidence, notice of hearing date, management of case records, court hearing, announce of judgment, and service of judgment. Especially, e-litigation can be very useful tool for court hearing, and can promote substantial court hearing through oral statements. In this situation, Korean judicial system should be improved through reducing burden of drafting written judgment. Second one is changes in human constitutes of judicial system. Korea established new law school system in 2009. Before the new system, lawyers who are bass of judicial system had been educated and trained by former Korean judicial examination and training at the Judicial Research and Training Institute. In the new system, such education and training are delegated to law school education and Korean bar examination. Training of lawyers through new law school system can contribute to expansion of rule of law because it allows people with diverse undergraduate backgrounds to be lawyers. Although there is criticisms pointing out that the new system will increase number of lawyers and competition among lawyers, it should be considered how to actively use more diverse and numbered lawyers for management of Korean judicial system. Such efforts are related to expansion of legal market and international competitiveness of Korean law firms, and directly connected with reinforcing roles of lawyers in dispute resolution process in Korea. Thus, in order to make active use of increased number of lawyers for management of judicial system, development of ways of enhancing lawyers’ roles in evidence collection process which can work similarly to U.S. discovery, and adoption of German lawyer settlement system should be considered. Third, roles of Supreme Court in dispute resolution should be reconsidered. Currently, Korean Supreme Court is disposing 36,000 cases per year. Such caseload caused Supreme Court barely conduct their function of unification of statute interpretation, which the Court has as a Court in the highest level. In terms of flow of dispute resolution, is can be said that red light is flashing at the final stage of dispute resolution. This indicates serious obstacle to Korean judicial system. In such situation, this article reviewed validity and legitimacy of proposal of the Final Appeal Court suggested by Supreme Court, in relation of changes and developments of appeal system. This article evaluates the proposal as optimistic in that the propos

미국민사소송법상의 판결의 효력(1) -좁은 의미의 Res Judicata를 중심으로-

정영환 ( Young Hwan Chung ) 안암법학회 2010 안암 법학 Vol.0 No.33

In the U.S. Civil Procedure, as for effect of the judgment, there is a concept of Res Judicata. The Res Judicata consists of Res Judicata in its narrow sense and collateral estoppel. The former could be referred to as claim preclusion, and the latter as issue preclusion. Among these concepts of Res Judicata, this article analyzes Res judicata in its narrow sense, namely, claim preclusion. For that purpose, I first review the concept and the legal character of Res Judicata in its narrow sense (chapter Ⅱ). Then I examine three requirements of it including i) former judgment should be valid and final judgment on the merits (chapter Ⅲ), ii) parties to former judgment and the later judgment have to be identical (chapter Ⅳ), ⅲ) claims of both judgments must be identical (chapter Ⅴ). Continuously, I keep reviewing general contents of Res Judicata in its narrow sense by examining its effect (chapter Ⅵ) and exception in application of the concept (chapter Ⅶ). By analyzing contents of Res Judicata in its narrows sense, I intend to figure out similarities and differences between Korea and U.S. in Civil Procedure.

박정희 정권의 스포츠정책 다시보기

정영환(Young Whan Chung),이호근(Ho Kun Yi),신현규(Hyun Gyu Shin) 한국사회체육학회 2009 한국사회체육학회지 Vol.0 No.35