http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
RISS 인기검색어
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 강병근 (검색결과 273 건)
- 무료
- 기관 내 무료
- 유료
-
-
-
-
Microstructural Evolution in Semisolid Forging of A356 Alloy
강병근,홍준표,최병희,장영수,손일 대한금속·재료학회 2015 METALS AND MATERIALS International Vol.21 No.1
A semisolid forging study using A356 alloy was carried out to investigate the evolution of microstructuresaffected by the solid fraction, the forging pressure and the addition of Sr. The semisolid slurry for forgingwas made by an electromagnetic stirring method. Microstructures were evaluated at two typical positions of thesemisolid forged specimens: one is the region, where direct forging pressure is applied, and the other is theregion, where the slurry was squeezed and extruded indirectly. Microstructural characteristics, such as themorphology of the primary Al particles and the eutectic Si, were changed with the positions observed. Asthe solid fraction increased, the morphology of the primary Al particles was transformed from rosette-like toglobular. As the forging pressure increased, the size of eutectic Si became fine. An increase of the forgingpressure is speculated to improve the interfacial heat transfer coefficient between the semisolid slurry andthe mould wall, leading to an increase of the cooling rate on the growth of eutectic Si. The addition of Sris effective in modifying the morphology for eutectic Si, especially when the forging pressure was low.
-
UNCITRAL 仲裁規則 改正草案 內容의 分析과 方向檢討
강병근 한국중재학회 2008 중재연구 Vol.18 No.2
At its thirty-ninth session(New York, 19 June - 7 July 2006), United Nations Commission on International Trade Law(hereinafter referred to as the Commission) agreed to give priority to the topic of revising the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. From the forty-fifth through the forty-seventh session, the Working Group checked various issues based on the draft revised version of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules prepared by the Secretariat. At its forty-eighth session, the Working Group is going to finish its first reading of articles 38 to 41 of the draft revised version of the UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, and to commence its second reading of the draft revised version of UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules. Korea is keen on enticing foreign direct investment into its territory. From the 1960s, Korea has concluded more than 80 BITs. Korea is making efforts to conclude FTAs with its trading partners. As of January, 2008, 3 FTAs have taken into effect with respect to Korea. According to provisions on dispute settlement found in such BITs and FTAs involving Korea, the Rules can be chosen for Investor-State Arbitration. Furthermore, the Rules is followed by the arbitration rules for domestic and international arbitrations administered by the Korean Commercial Arbitration Board. If the Commission adopts the revised version of UNCITRAL Arbitration Rules, the Rules will be able to give impact on the arbitration law and practice around the world of arbitration. That is the reason why we should keep attention to the development of the deliberations of the Working Group.
-
-
강병근 한국중재학회 2017 중재연구 Vol.27 No.2
On 9 March 2017, a Tribunal constituted under the ICSID Convention issued its ruling in the case of Ansung Housing v. People's Republic of China, dismissing with prejudice all claims made by the Claimant, Ansung Housing Co., Ltd., in its Request for Arbitration, pursuant to ICSID Arbitration Rule 41(5). Ansung Housing v. PRC has drawn attention since it is the first case where an investor with Korean nationality initiated an ICSID arbitration on the basis of the Korea-China Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) as amended in 2007 between the Republic of Korea and the People's Republic of China. The Tribunal finds that its ruling is about a lack of jurisdiction of the ICSID and of its own competence as well as regarding manifest lack of legal merit due to a lack of temporal jurisdiction, since a Respondent’s Rule 41(5) objection is concerned with the three-year limitation period in Article 9(7) of the Korea-China BIT. The Tribunal held that, under Article 9(7) of the Korea-China BIT, the limitation period begins with an investor’s first knowledge of the fact that it has incurred loss or damage, not with the date on which it gains knowledge of the quantum of that loss or damage. Finally, the Tribunal held that Ansung submitted its dispute to ICSID and made its claim for purposes of Article 9(3) and (7) of the BIT after more than three years had elapsed from the date on which Ansung first acquired knowledge of loss or damage and that the claim is time-barred and, as such, is manifestly without legal merit. It remains to be seen whether the aggrieved Claimant initiates annulment proceedings before an ad hoc committee under the ICSID Convention. It is quite interesting to see whether the decisions by the Tribunal should be reversed on the basis of the Claimant’s arguments as to the start date as well as the end date of the limitation period under the Korea-China BIT. 안성주택과 중국의 ICSID 중재사건에서 2017년 3월 9일 내려진 중재판정은 2007년 개정된 한중 투자보장협정을 근거로 한 첫 번째 ICSID 중재판정이다. 이 사건에서 중재판정부는 신청인의 중재청구가 한중 투자보장협정 제9조 제7항에 의하여 3년의 제척기간을 경과했기에 본안사항에 대하여 판단할 권한이 없다고 판정하였다. ICSID 협약에 따른 중재판정 취소절차가 개시된다면 제척기간의 시기와 종기에 대한 중재판정부의 판단에 대해서 다툼이 있을 것이다.
-
-
강병근 법무부 2012 선진상사법률연구 Vol.- No.58
The Korean Arbitration Act of 1999 has followed the principles and structure of the UNCITRAL Model Law on International Commercial Arbitration as adopted in 1985. For nearly over a decade, the laws and practices of the world community of arbitration have been evolving very fast. It is unfortunate that Korea has still preserved out-dated provisions in her law on arbitration. To the contrary, Scotland has discarded her out-dated arbitration regulations instead of adopting the new Arbitration Act of 2010. The Act of 2010 has become quite user-friendly by describing each provisions by the letter of ‘M’ for mandatory sections and rules or ‘D’ for discretionary ones. The Act of 2010 distinguishes juridical place of arbitration from physical or convenient place of arbitration, which may result in different uses of applicable laws. When the juridical place of arbitration is set in Scotland, the Scots law may be applied. The Act of 2010 has provisions on the party to arbitration agreement who does not take part in arbitration, and anonymity of arbitrating parties who were involved in court proceedings with regard to arbitration. Under the Act, confidential information should not be revealed, subject to exceptions provided for in the Act. The Act of 2010 has also provisions on appointing authority and consolidation of multiple claims. Furthermore, under the Scots legal system, arbitral awards may be enforced by the ‘order’ or ‘leave’ of the competent court. Scotland may be different from Korea in light of the size of population and economy. Nevertheless, the two countries are most likely to share the desire to develop each of their capitals to be a sort of center of international arbitration by attracting more international arbitration cases. 우리나라는 1985년 UNCITRAL 모델 법을 받아 들였던 1999년 이후 국제중재법의 발달을 반영하는 국내입법을 시도한 적이 없다. 스코틀랜드는 2010년 중재법을 통해서 산만했던 중재법규 대신 포괄적인 중재법을 갖게 되었다. 2010년 스코틀랜드 중재법의 큰 특징 중 하나는 중재법과 함께 부속서에서 중재규칙을 포함하고 있는 점이다. 또한, 조문마다 당사자의 합의에 따라서 변경할 수 있는 조항과 그렇지 않은 조문을 ‘M’과 ‘D’로 표시함으로써 중재법 규정의 해석과 적용을 둘러 싼 분쟁의 소지를 차단하고자 하였다. 사실상 중재지와 법적 중재지를 구분하고, 스코틀랜드 내에 법적 중재지가 정해질 경우 2010년 스코틀랜드 중재법 본문과 부속서의 중재규칙 그리고 이들 법규칙이 규율하지 않는 사항에 대해서 스코틀랜드 판례법이 적용되도록 한 점도 주목할 만하다. 2010년 스코틀랜드 중재법에서는 중재합의의 효력을 넓게 인정하여 비록 드물기는 하지만 구두 계약마저 중재합의의 한 형태로 인정될 여지를 두었다. 무엇보다도, 스코틀랜드 법상 중재판정을 ‘명령’이나 ‘결정’의 방식으로 집행되도록 하는 입법례는 우리 중재법과 사뭇 다르다. 2010년 스코틀랜드 중재법에서는 중재당사자가 아닌 중재합의의 당사자가 중재관련 소송에 참여하여 자신의 법익을 적극적으로 주장하여 지킬 수 있도록 하였으며, 중재당사자의 경우는 중재관련 소송에서 자신의 인적 사항이 드러나지 않도록 할 수도 있게 규정하였다. 2010년 스코틀랜드 중재법은 중재당사자들이 합의하지 않은 경우 중재인의 수는 단독으로 할 수 있도록 하였고, 중재인 선정 기관에 대해서 비교적 상세한 규정을 두고 있다. 스코틀랜드 중재법의 비밀 유지의무에 관한 사항이나 복수의 청구를 병합하는 규정 역시 우리 중재법에서 찾을 수 없는 것들이다. 우리나라와 스코틀랜드는 인구의 크기나 경제활동 면에서 다르지만, 중재 법제를 정비함으로써 국제중재를 더 많이 유치하려는 열망은 같다. 장차 우리 중재법을 개정할 경우 2010년 스코틀랜드 중재법과 같은 입법 방식도 적극 고려해야 할 것이다.
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
