남북상사중재위원회 구성·운영 활성화 방안

강병근 韓國仲裁學會 2004 중재연구 Vol.14 No.1

North Korea and South Korea agreed to refer their investment disputes to arbitration by adopting 'Agreed Minutes on Procedure of Settlement of Commercial Disputes' on 16th December 2000. According to the Agreed Minutes, the two Koreas were to establish an arbitration commission within 6 months after the Agreed Minutes had been signed. In 2002, North Korea enacted laws to draw interest of foreign tourists to Mountain Kumgang and to boost investment into the region of Kaesung as it provided in those laws that commercial disputes should be settled by arbitration or judicial procedures. In October 2003, the two Koreas succeeded in adopting another Agreed Minutes as to the establishment and functioning of North-South Arbitration Commission. The fact that the two Koreas have agreed to establish an arbitration commission is meaningful since they are leading their lives quite differently in political, social, and economic sense for more than a half century. Although there still remain doubts as to the North Korean policy on nuclear matters, an arbitration commission could be a cornerstone for the set-up of the dispute settlement system between the two Koreas and a great help for investors from South Korea to pursue their possible legal claims as North Korea is eager to invite South Korean businessmen and other foreign investors to invest in its special economic areas. According to the Agreed Minutes of 2003, the two Koreas are going to adopt procedural rules for the arbitration commission. It will be a great challenge for them to agree on specific issues as to the operation of the arbitration commission. They have to set up a roster of arbitrators respectively and may have to enact or revise their own arbitration laws and rules reflecting the Agreed Minutes of 2000 and 2003. It is quite welcome that the two Koreas have agreed to set up an arbitration commission rather than resort to political or diplomatic means to settle their disputes. The success of the arbitration system between the two Koreas will make sure the safety of investment environment in the northen part of the Korean Peninsula and will bring the peace to the Korean peninsula earlier than expected.

남북 상사중재기구의 운영과 실행과제

김상호 韓國仲裁學會 2008 중재연구 Vol.18 No.2

The purpose of this paper is to make a research on the administration and practical problems of the arbitral organization called 「uth-North Commercial Arbitration Commission」. The Arbitration Commission shall be set up under the South-North Agreements officially called 「reement on Settlement Procedure of Commercial Dispute」and 「reement on Organization and Administration of the South-North Arbitration Commission」 between the South and the North of Korea. A variety means of dispute settlement including friendly consultations, conciliation and arbitration called Altemative Dispute Resolution(ADR) will be used frequently and institutionally to settle commercial disputes and conflicts arising from economic transactions between the South and the North of Korea. Under the circumstances, it is becoming a problem of vital importance how to operate the Arbitration Commission for the prompt and effective settlement of the South-North commercial disputes. First of all, the South and the North of Korea should recognize the availability of prompt and effective means of dispute resolution such as arbitration and conciliation to be made by the Arbitration Commission would promote the orderly growth and encouragement of th South-North trade and investment, for which the following measures should be taken as soon as possible : 1. Enactment of the South-North Arbitration Rules. 2. Designation of the arbitral institution by North-Korean side. In this connection, the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) was already designated officially as the arbitral organization of South Korean side as of April 17, 2007. 3. Arbitration shall be held in the place where the respondent has his domicile, in case that both parties fail to agree as to the place of arbitration. 4. Permission of a third country arbitration in case that both parties agree to do so. 5. To become a member country of international arbitration agreements including the New York Convention.

북한의 외국인투자법과 대외경제중재법의 적용범위

전우정 한국중재학회 2020 중재연구 Vol.30 No.2

The Scope of Application of North Korea’s Foreign Economic Arbitration Act and Foreign Investment Act This article examines whether the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act and the Foreign Investment Act of North Korea apply to South Korean parties or companies. This article analyzes laws and agreements related to economic cooperation between South Korea and North Korea. Furthermore, this article compares and evaluates laws related to foreign investment and enacted in North Korea. Now, North Korea’s door is closed due to economic sanctions against it, but it will be opened soon. Thus, this article prepares for the future opening of North Korea’s markets. Is there a rule of laws in North Korea or just a ruler? Are there laws in North Korea? North Korea has enacted a number of legislation to attract foreign investors, referring to those Chinese laws. For example, North Korea enacted the Foreigner Investment Act, the Foreigner Company Act, the Foreign Investment Bank Act, the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, the Foreign Economic Contract Act, the International Trade Act, and the Free Economy and Trade Zone Act, among others. Article 2 (2) of the Foreign Investment Law of North Korea states, “Foreign investors are corporations and individuals from other countries investing in our country.” It is interpreted that South Korea is not included in the “other countries” of this definition. According to many mutual agreements signed by South Korea and North Korea, the relationship between the two Koreas is a special relation inside the Korean ethnic group. An arbitration between a South Korean party and a North Korean party has the characteristics of both domestic arbitrations and international arbitrations. If the South Korea and North Korea Commercial Arbitration Commission or the Kaesong Industrial Complex Arbitration Commission is not established, the possibility of arbitration by the Chosun International Trade Arbitration Commission, established under North Korea’s Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, should be examined. There have been no cases where the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act is applied to disputes between parties of South Korea and North Korea. It might be possible to apply the Foreign Economic Arbitration Act by recognizing the “foreign factor” of a dispute between the South Korean party and North Korean party. It is necessary to raise legislative clarifications by revising the North Korea’s Foreign Economic Arbitration Act as to whether Korean parties or companies are included in the scope of this Act’s application. Even if it is interpreted that South Korean parties or companies are not included in the scope of North Korea’s Foreign Economic Arbitration Act, disputes between South Korean companies and North Korean companies can be resolved by foreign arbitration institutes such as CIETAC in China, HKIAC in Hong Kong, or SIAC in Singapore. Such arbitration awards could be enforced in North Korea pursuant to Article 64 of North Korea’s Foreign Economic Arbitration Act. This is because the arbitration awards of foreign arbitration institutes are included in the scope of North Korea’s Foreign Economic Arbitration Act. The matter is how to enforce the North Korean laws when a North Korean party or North Korean government does not abide by the laws or their contracts. It is essential for North Korea to join the New York Convention (Convention on the Recognition and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards) and the ICSID Convention (Convention on the Settlement of Investment Disputes Between States and Nationals of Other States). 이 논문은 북한의 대외경제중재법과 외국인투자법이 우리나라 기업에게도 적용되는지를 고찰한다. 이를 위해 남북한의 경제협력에 관계된 법률과 합의서 등을 분석하고, 북한의 외국인 투자에 관계된 법률들과 비교 분석하였다. 지금은 대북 경제제재로 북한의 문이 닫혀 있지만, 미리 준비한다는 차원에서 북한 법률의 적용 여부에 대하여 살펴보았다. 북한의 외국인투자법 제2조 제2호는 “외국투자가란 우리 나라에 투자하는 다른 나라의 법인, 개인이다.”라고 정의하고 있다. 이 정의 조항의 “다른 나라”에 대한민국이 포함되지 않는다고 해석된다. 만약에 남북상사중재위원회 또는 개성공단 상사중재위원회가 계속 설립되지 않는다면, 북한의 대외경제중재법에 따라서 설립되어 있는 조선국제무역중재위원회에서 중재를 할 가능성을 타진해 보아야 할 것이다. 아직까지 남북간의 분쟁으로 대외경제중재법이 적용된 실례는 없으나, 우리나라에 대해 “외국적 요소”를 인정해 대외경제중재법을 적용시킬 수 있을 것이다. 개성공단 내 상사분쟁에 관하여 남북상사중재위원회에서 중재한다는 일반적인 합의는 있더라도 구체적인 규정이 없는 경우에는 대외경제중재법에 따라 중재로 진행할 수도 있을 것이다. 우리나라 기업이 대외경제중재법의 적용대상에 포함되는지에 대하여 법을 개정하여 입법적으로 명확히 할 필요가 있다. 북한의 대외경제중재법은 북한에서는 강제력이 있다. 가령 우리나라 기업이 북한의 대외경제중재법의 적용범위에 포함되지 않는다고 해석하더라도, 그 여부에 관계없이, 우리나라 기업과 북한 기업 간의 분쟁을 중국의 CIETAC, 홍콩의 HKIAC, 싱가포르의 SIAC 등의 외국 중재기관에서 중재판정을 받으면, 북한의 대외경제중재법 제64조에 의하여 북한에서 집행할 수 있을 것이다. 외국에서 받은 중재판정은 북한의 대외경재중재법의 적용범위에 포함되기 때문이다. 여기서의 “외국”에 우리나라 대한민국이 포함되지 않는다고 해석하더라도, 그 여부에 관계없이, 명확하게 “외국”에 포함되는 것으로 해석되는 중국, 홍콩, 싱가포르 등 국가의 중재기관에서 중재판정을 받으면 북한에서 집행할 수 있을 것이다.

중국의 해사중재제도에 관한 연구

오세영 동덕여자대학교 산업연구소 2005 산업연구 Vol.11 No.-

중국은 러시아와 함께 일찍이 해사분쟁을 대외무역분쟁과 분리하여 다르게 취급해 온 나라에 속한다. 역사적인 원인 때문에 중국의 해사분쟁의 처리는 특수성을 갖게 되었고, 그것은 대략 "4방법, 3기구, 2제도"로 표현할 수 있다. 해사분쟁을 해결하는 4방법은 화해, 조정, 중재 및 소송이며, 3기구는 항무감독, 해사중재위원회 및 해사법원이며, 2제도는 해사중재제도와 해사소송제도이다. 따라서 중국에서 해사중재제도는 해사소송제도와 더불어 중국의 해사분쟁을 해결하는 중용한 수단이 되고 있다. 중국에서 해상운송사업의 발전에 따라 해사분쟁은 날로 증가하여 왔으며, 해사중재는 해사분쟁을 처리하는 중요한 방법 가운데 하나가 되었다. 중국의 해사중재는 국제경제무역중재와 마찬가지로 국내의 국제중재의 성격을 지니고 있다. 양자는 중재기구와 사건수리범위가 다른 것을 제외하고는 많은 공통점이 있다. 중국해사중재위원회 업무의 또 하나의 중요한 특징은 중재와 조정의 상호결합의 정신을 관철하여, 조정이 가능한 모든 사건에 대해서는 가능한 한 조정으로 해결 한다는 것이다. 해사중재위원회가 매년 수리하는 사건의 반수 이상이 조정을 통하여 종결된다. 해사분쟁의 해결방법 가운데서 조정은 해사분쟁을 처리하는 경우에 반드시 거쳐야 하는 방법은 아니지만 지금까지 많은 해사분쟁이 이 방법을 통하여 해결 되어 왔다. 이러한 것은 일반적으로 해사분쟁을 조정에 의해 해결하는 것이 쉽지 않는 서구의 경향과는 상당한 차이가 있다. China is a nation that maritime disputes in distinction from overseas trade disputes have been dealt with. China has a peculiar practice of "four ways, three organizations and two systems on the maritime disputes. Four ways include compromise, conciliation, arbitration and suit. Three organizations are superintendence of harbour, maritime arbitration commission and maritime lawsuit court. Two systems are martitime arbitration and maritime suit. Therefore, in China, the maritime arbitration is one of important means to resolve the disputes arising from maritime affairs. China maritime arbitration has a nature of an international arbitration like international economic and trade arbitration. The former is almost equal to the latter except for the structure of commission and scope of application. Another trait of China maritime arbitration, if possible. More than half of disputes which the maritime arbitration commission accepts to resolve has been settled by means of conciliation. This is very different from the Western. They say that it is very hard to settle the disputes by conciliation.

노동쟁의에 있어서 사적 조정의 기능 및 필요성과 OECD 다국적기업 가이드라인 이의신청절차의 활용 가능성

이준희 한국사회법학회 2022 社會法硏究 Vol.- No.47

Collective bargaining includes collective bargaining for the purpose of signing a collective agreement and collective bargaining, not for the purpose of signing a collective agreement. The TULRA of Korea defines the concept of a industrial disputes as “any controversy or difference arising from disagreements between a trade union and an employer or employers’ association with respect to the determination of terms and conditions of employment”. The TULRA defines the concept of industrial disputes too narrowly. According to this definition, only “interest disputes” aimed at signing collective agreements are approved as the subject of collective bargaining. Because of that provision, the Labor Relations Commission of Korea does not provide public arbitration services for the disagreements between parties to labor relations that arise in the process of collective bargaining, not for the purpose of concluding collective agreements. In order to compensate for this, it is necessary to actively utilize private arbitration. However, private arbitration between parties to labor relations is rarely used in Korea. In this study, private arbitration is divided into private arbitration in a narrow sense and private arbitration in a wide sense. Private arbitration in a narrow sense refers to arbitration that can replace public arbitration under TULRA. In a wide sense, private arbitration refers to arbitration for bargaining targets that are not subject to arbitration under TULRA. And I suggested the procedure, effect, and activation plan of these private arbitrations. In addition, the possibility of using the OECD disputes resolution procedure operated by the NCP as a private arbitration system in the collective bargaining process is reviewed in this study. However, I pointed out that there are some problems that must be solved in order for the disputes resolution procedure operated by the NCP to be used more actively as a private arbitration system, and suggested improvement measures. 단체교섭에는 단체협약 체결 목적 단체교섭과 단체협약 체결 목적이 아닌 단체교섭이 있다. 현행 노조법은 노동쟁의의 개념을 “근로조건의 결정에 관한 주장의 불일치로 인하여 발생한 분쟁상태”라고 정의하여 단체협약 체결을 목적으로 하는 이익분쟁만을 단체교섭의 대상으로 한정하고 있다. 그러나, 현행 노조법상 노동쟁의의 개념이 지나치게 좁게 설정되어 있어 단체교섭 과정에서 발생한 노사간 주장의 불일치 중 상당부분, 즉 단체협약 체결 목적이 아닌 단체교섭과정 중 발생한 이견은 노동위원회를 통한 공적 조정의 대상에서 제외되는 문제가 발생하고 있다. 이를 보완하기 위해 사적 조정을 적극적으로 활용해야 할 필요가 있지만, 우리나라에서는 사적 조정의 활용률이 매우 저조하다. 이 연구에서는 사적 조정을 현행 노조법상 공적 조정을 대체할 수 있는 협의의 사적 조정과 현행 노조법상 공적 조정의 대상이 되지 않는 교섭대상에 대한 조정인 광의의 사적 조정으로 나누어 각각 조정의 절차와 효과, 활성화 방안을 검토했다. 또한 NCP가 운영하는 OECD 분쟁해결절차가 사적 조정제도로서 활용될 수 있는 가능성을 검토하고, 이 제도가 사적 조정제도로서 더욱 활성화될 수 있도록 개선 방안을 제시했다.

아랍에미리트 중재법

박이세(Park, Issey) 한국국제사법학회 2019 國際私法硏究 Vol.25 No.2

아랍에미리트(United Arab Emirates, 이하 “UAE”)는 2018. 5. 15. 중재에 관한 2018년 연방법 제6호(이하 “UAE 중재법” 또는 “연방중재법”)를 공포하였다. 초안이 처음 회람된 것이 2008년이라고 하니 꼬박 10년 만의 일이다. 이 단행법의 제정으로 민사소송법에 관한 1992년 연방법 제11호의 중재편을 삭제한다. 시행일은 2018. 6. 16.이니, 어느덧 일 년 넘는 시간이 흘렀다. 한국 은 국제거래법에 관한 국제연합 위원회(United Nations Commission on International Trade Law, UNCITRAL)가 1985년 채택하고 2006년 개정한 국제상 사중재에 관한 모델법(UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration, 이하 “모델법”)을 1999년에 전면 수용하여 국제적으로 검증된 보편성이 있는 중재법을 가지게 되었고, 현행 중재법은 개정 모델법을 10년만인 2016년에 수용한 것인데, 여기에서는 UAE 중재법의 주요 내용을 한국중재법과의 차이점 위주로 일부 소개한다. UAE 중재법 중 가장 눈에 띄는 점은 신속성을 강조하는 기간의 명시인데, 이를 통해 법원이 사건을 신속하게 처리해야 하고 중재절차가 신속하게 진행되어야 한다는 취지만큼이나 분명해져야 할 것은 훈시규정인 여부 등 위반 관련 문제이다. 중재인이 중재지 밖에서도 중재판정에 서명할 수 있고, 중재조항을 포함하는 표준계약서를 인용하는 경우도 서면에 의한 중재합의로 본다는 등의 명시는 UAE 중재실무를 고려한 현실적인 조치로 보인다. 중재인 독립성 강조, 다수당사자와 선결문제 관련 기준 제시, 중재인 윤리강령 및 명부 작성 등의 시도는 높이 살만하다. 전자통신기술 활용의 의지도 도처에서 엿볼 수 있다. UAE는 가히 중동에서 국제상사중재가 가장 활성화 된 국가라고 할 수 있는데, 연방중재법의 제정은 역내(onshore) 중재마저 이미 모델법에 기초하여 중재에 호의적인 두바이국제금융센터(Dubai International Financial Centre, DIFC) 중재법 내지 아부다비세계시장(Abu Dhabi Global Market, ADGM) 중재법에 따른 역외(offshore) 중재와 비슷한 수준에서 병존시키기 위한 마지막 퍼즐 조각과 같은 것이다. On 3 May 2018, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) promulgated Federal Law No. 6 of 2018 on Arbitration (“Federal Arbitration Law”). The enactment of this stand-alone legislation, which entered into force on 16 June 2018, replaces the Arbitration Chapter of Federal Law No. 11 of 1992 on the Civil Procedures Law. The Republic of Korea in 1999, adopted the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration 1985 and in 2016, its amendments as adopted in 2006. This article briefly introduces the Federal Arbitration Law of the UAE by comparing it with the Arbitration Act of Korea. Most notably, the Federal Arbitration Law imposes time limits for the various stages of proceedings, thereby emphasising the endeavour to expedite the process (articles 15(2), 19(2), 21(4), 25, 30, and 42(1)). In light of the arbitration practice in the UAE and to bring an end to controversies, article 41(6) states that an arbitral award may be “signed [...] outside the place of arbitration”, and article 7(2) that “[t]he requirement that an Arbitration Agreement be in writing is met [...] [i]f a reference is made in a written contract to the terms of a Model Contract, international agreement or any other document containing an arbitration clause”. The Federal Arbitration Law strives to ensure independence, impartiality, and transparency (articles 10(2) and 58) and attempts to address, among others, incidental question (article 43) and multiple parties (article 22). It also promotes the use of electronic and other modern means of communication and technology (articles 28(2), 33(3), 35, and 41(6)). By proffering Financial Free Zones, such as the Dubai International Financial Centre (DIFC) and the Abu Dhabi Global Market (ADGM) as offshore jurisdictions, the UAE may already be the most arbitration-friendly in the Middle East. The Federal Arbitration Law seeks to fill the gap to bring the onshore jurisdiction to a level comparable to the two.

통신위원회 재정(裁定)의 법적 성격과 불복방법

정호경 한양대학교 법학연구소 2007 법학논총 Vol.24 No.2

Korea Communications Commission (KCC) is an independent regulatory agency, which is established by the Article 37 of Telecommunications Basic Act. And it develop and enforce policies which promote fair competition in the telecommunication marketplace, and protects the interests of telecommunications consumers also. It is charged with deliberating issues concerning fair competition environments and consumer protection of telecommunication services, and with arbitrating disputes among telecommunication service carriers and between users and carriers. It arbitrates disputes among telecommunication service carriers regarding provision of facilities, interconnection, collocation of facilities and provision of information related with the facilities, and consumers' loss or damage from telecommunications services. KCC make the exclusive(quasi-jurisdictional) decisions on arbitration. Before making arbitration, the KCC gives the concerned parties an opportunity to present an opinion and sends the arbitration in a form of a document to each party. When a lawsuit is not initiated within 60 days from the day when the document is delivered to the parties or when a lawsuits cancelled, it is deemed that an agreement is reached between the parties as the same defined in the arbitration. But the arbitration in KCC is not the arbitration in Arbitration-law, and it has not any meaning in process-law. It is just adjudication of agency. So we can bring an action against KCC for nullity of the adjudication.

언론보도 명예훼손에 대한 국민권익 침해 사례연구 -서비스 대응성과 사회 책무성 제고 관점에서-

황성호 ( Sung Ho Hwang ),이환범 ( Hwan Beom Lee ) 영남대학교 한국균형발전연구소 2010 한국지역혁신논집 Vol.5 No.1

The purpose of this study is to examine the reasons that the mechanisms for protecting from personal defamations by mass media weren`t effectively operated. To achieve the aim of this study, it is to identify the reasons of the national right infringement by analyzing the cases of personal defamation. As well, it is to suggest the effective alternatives to protect national rights from the personal defamation by mass media based on the focal point of service responsiveness and social accountability. The results of analysis are appeared that the levels of Press Arbitration Commission`s service responsiveness and mass media`s social accountability are low. We can find the reasons for a low level of Press Arbitration Commission`s service responsiveness as follows: authoritative organizational operation, service offer just focused on the quickness of judgment, and rules that wasn`t considered client`s needs. With respect to the social accountability of mass media, in turn, irresponsibility, ethical impropriety, and the news competition of press are the reasons that mass media don`t keep the social accountability. On the basis of research results, the study is expected to provide useful information to improve both Press Arbitration Commission`s service responsiveness and mass media`s social accountability. In this context, the study suggests improvements as follows: reinforcement of Press Arbitration Commission`s marketing activity, strengthening administrative services and simplification of procedures of Press Arbitration Commission, improvement of Press Arbitration Commission`s client orientation, reinforcement of accountability and ethics of mass media, eradication of press`s the news competition, and establishment of desirable coverage environment.

국제 상사분쟁의 새로운 경향 : 중국, 싱가포르, 미국의 Med-Arb(조정-중재) 하이브리드의 출현과 함의

김대중,김세진 한국세계지역학회 2019 세계지역연구논총 Vol.37 No.1

Recently, use of mediation and Arbitration rather than the use of traditional litigation in domestic as well as international commercial dispute resolution is increasing. International arbitration institutions in Singapore, Shanghai and US are more frequently used as the amount of international commercial arbitration is rising and as amicable settlement become more favored. However, arbitration is losing its inherent advantages such as rapidity and low cost because it becomes quite similar with traditional litigation. Also, mediation is becoming more popular since it makes amicable relationship and thorough statement possible. In Singapore, China and US, mediation-arbitration hybrid has been used to take advantage of both dispute resolution methods. China has been utilizing Arb-Med which executes mediation while arbitration process continues, but this Arb-Med is still early to be used in international dispute resolution regime. Singapore, in the mean time, has been adopting a model clause and has been using a new Arb-Med-Arb hybrid which can be promptly used in international parties. United States has been using Med-Arb in the field of labor dispute ever since 1970s. This Med-Arb in US is combining mediation’s flexibility and arbitration’s enforceability. Recent American Arbitration Association’s making rules regarding seperation of mediator and arbitraor in Med-Arb process is to timely raise transparency and legality of the Med-Arb. Korean government also will need to prepare for the trade dispute with these countries by researching and analyzing this hybrid dispute resolution method. 최근 국내와 국제 상사관계의 분쟁해결은 승패를 가리는 소송보다는 당사자 자치 원칙에의거하여 유연하게 진행할 수 있는 조정과 중재 등의 대체적 분쟁해결(ADR)의 이용률이점차 증가하고 있다. 상사관계에서 우호적인 관계의 지속이 중요해지고, 최근 국제 상사중재의 분쟁 규모가 점차 커지는 가운데 싱가포르, 상하이, 미국 등의 국제 중재기관이 활발하게이용되고 있다. 하지만 상사분쟁의 사건 건수가 증가하고, 이용률이 높아지면서 중재(arbitration)는 신속성, 저렴한 비용, 소송을 대체하는 해결방식이라는 고유의 특성을 잃어가고있다. 이와 더불어, 당사자 간의 우호적인 비즈니스 관계를 유지하면서 이해관계를 깊이있게진술하는 것이 가능하고 중재보다 유연성있는 조정(Mediation)의 이용이 더욱 빈번해지고있다. 현재 중재나 조정 단일 수단으로 해결하기에는 분쟁의 복잡성 문제가 있으며, 중재는소송처럼 고비용화되어지고, 조정은 합의의 구속력이 없는 등의 문제가 남아있다. 이에 중재와조정 등의 대체적 분쟁해결(Alternative Dispute Resolution)을 하이브리드 형 결합을 통해서로의 한계점을 보완하려는 목적으로 싱가포르, 중국, 미국 등에서 다양한 방식이 도출되었다. 중국에서는 조정을 중요시해왔던 역사적 성격으로 중재 중에 조정을 결합한 Arb-Med가있으나 국제적으로 인정받기에는 투명성과 승인집행의 문제가 남아있다. 싱가포르에서는Arb- Med-Arb라는 새로운 중재-조정 결합이 등장하면서 국제적 기준에 맞도록 중재규칙을정하고, 적절한 Model Clause를 제시하였다. 미국에서도 1970년대 이후로 노동분쟁을 비롯한다양한 분야에서 조정-중재(Med-Arb) 하이브리드가 사용되면서 조정의 유연성과 중재의구속력을 결합하고자하였다. 최근 미국의 미국중재협회(AAA)에서 조정인과 중재인을 분리하는 규칙을 만들어내면서 하이브리드형의 한계점을 개선하고자 하였는데, 이는 Med-Arb의 투명성과 적법성을 높이는 것이 그 중요 쟁점이다. 한국 또한 중국, 싱가포르, 미국과의상사 및 무역분쟁에 대비하여 이러한 하이브리드 분쟁해결 기제에 대한 연구와 적절한 입법이필요할 것이다.

남북상사중재위원회 운영의 효율화 방안 연구

김상호 韓國仲裁學會 2004 중재연구 Vol.14 No.2

To realize the spirit of the South-North Joint Declaration of June 15, 2000, the competent authorities of the South and the North of Korea have reached two Agreements to settle commercial disputes as well as to set up an arbitral organization called 'South-North Commercial Arbitration Commission'. The Commission is an institutional organization for settlement of commercial disputes arising from trade and investment between south and north Korea. Under the situation, it is becoming a problem of vital importance how to manage and control the Commission for prompt and effective settlement of south-north commercial disputes. While analyzing the above two Agreements for dispute-settlement mechanism, the author proposes desirable ideas and directions in connection with the Commission as follows : 1. First of all, the Commission should become a central common system for settlement of commercial disputes which meets the demand of capitalistic market economy. 2. The Authorities of south and north Korea should recognize that the availability of prompt, effective and economical means of disputes resolution such as arbitration and conciliation to be made by the Commission would promote the orderly growth and encouragement of south-north trade and investment. 3. The Korean Commercial Arbitration Board(KCAB) should be designated as the Arbitration Commission of South Korea because the KCAB is the only authorized institution in South Korea, statutorily empowered to settle any kind of commercial disputes at home and abroad.