WTO 반덤핑협정상 동종상품 정의규정의 개정방안

이환규(Lee. Hwan-Gyu) 성균관대학교 법학연구소 2004 성균관법학 Vol.16 No.1

Like product is a central concept in the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade. It appears in numerous provisions, and then defines to which products the rights and obligations of the GATT Agreement apply. Although it is a central concept, and has been around since the origins of GATT in 1947, the definition of like products is not settled. As a result of Uruguay Round, WTO Anti-Dumping Agreement provides the following definition of "like product": Throughout this Agreement the term 'like product' (' produit similaire') shall be interpreted to mean a product which is identicat, i.e. alike in all aspect to the product under consideration, or in the absence of such a product, another product which, although not alike in all respects, has characteristics closely resembling those of the product under consideration. But this definition obviously leaves much room for interpretation.1n other words, the definition makes like prduct interpreted somewhat flexibly. This paper is aimed to prove that like product in WTO Anti-Dumping Law should be interpreted narrowly.And to get this goal, the definion should be amended as follows: First, like product shall be interpreted to mean a product which is identical, i.e. alike in all aspect to the product under consideration. Second, like product shall be interpreted to mean a product which is identical, i.e. alike in all aspect to the product under consideration, or in the absence of such a product, another product which, although not alike in all respects, has characteristics very closely resembling those of the product under consideration. Third, like product shall be interpreted to mean a product which is identical in physical characteristics subject, however, to such variations in presentation which are due to the need to adapt the the product to special conditions in the market of the importing country.

법률상 특정성과 사실상 특정성-미국 상무부와 국제통상법원 판정을 중심으로-

이환규(Lee Hwan Gyu) 성균관대학교 비교법연구소 2003 성균관법학 Vol.15 No.2

A countervailable subsidy exists under U.s. Countervailing Duty Law when the Department of Commerce finds that a forelgu government program provides selechve treatment to an enterprise or industry, or group of enterprises or industnes, and provides a countervailable benefit with respect to the merchandise. The first requirement is specificity test. The concept of specificity was basically developed in the U.S. admini­strative and statutory Implementation of Countervailing Duty Law. This was introduced explicitly in the U.S. Countervailing Duty Statute of 1979 implemenhng the Tokyo Round Code. The relevant inquiry regarding specificity is whether a competitive advantage bestowed by the government IS given to a parhcular enterpnse or industry, or group thereof, such that the benefit is capable of causing a misallocation of a country's economic resources. Commerce has repeatedly stressed that there is no preCise formula for determining whether specIficity exists and that such determinations must be made on a program-by-program basis. Nonetheless, many of the factors that Commerce considers relevant remain constant, even though the weight that Commerce gives any particular factor or the methodology that it uses varies from one case to another. Putsuant to the Countervailing Duty Law, a finding of specificity can be based upon a showing that the benefits of a program are specially provided either de jure or de facto. Where the authonty providing the subsidy, or the legislation pursuant to which the authority operates, expressly limits access to the subsidy to an enterprise or mdustry, the subsidy is specific as a matter of law. Where there are reasons to believe that a subsidy may be specific as a matter of fact, the subsidy is specific if one or more of the following factors exist: First, the actual recipients of the subsidy, whether considered on an enterprise or industry basis, are limited in number. Second, an enterprise or industry is a predominant user of the subsidy. Third, an enterprise or industry receives a disproportionately large amount of the subsidy. Forth, the manner in which the authority providing the subsidy has exercised discretion in the decision to grant the subsidy indicates that an enterprise or industry is favored over others.

WTO 반덤핑협정의 개정방안에 관한 연구 - DDA 협상에서의 논의를 중심으로 : WTO 반덤핑협정의 개정방안에 관한 연구

이환규(Lee Hwan Gyu) 성균관대학교 비교법연구소 2007 성균관법학 Vol.19 No.2

Since the Doha Development Agenda (DDA) negotiation was launched in January 2002, the Negotiating Group on Rules has discussed four areas including Anti-dumping Agreement. Pursuant to the DDA mandate, the Group has worked mainly to clarify and improve disciplines of the Agreement. In the WTO DDA rules negotiation, the FANs (Friends of Anti-dumping Agreement) group composed of 17 WTO members (including Korea) who strongly want to amend the current Anti-dumping Agreement initiated discussion on issues such as prohibiting zeroing, review, sunset, and fact available. They also submitted concrete proposals aimed at amending provisions concerning these issues. As for Korea, whose economy heavily depends on trade and which is one of the major victims of the anti-dumping measures, the importance of these issues cannot be underestimated. This paper analyzes these issues discussed at the Group and suggests Korea"s negotiating direction concerning the Agreement. Also it proposes certain guidance for amending the Agreement.

EU의 무역구제제도 연구

이환규(Lee, Hwan-Gyu) 전북대학교 법학연구소 2016 법학연구 Vol.50 No.-

Trade defence instruments, such as antidumping measure, countervailing measure and safeguard measure are ways of protecting European production against international trade distortions. The EU’s initiation activity expressed in average initiations has been decreasing. The number of anti-subsidy and antidumping measures in force is at a historical low and the overall number of measures in force in the EU is much lower than in other major WTO members. The European Commission is responsible for investigating allegations of dumping by exporting producers in non-EU countries. It usually opens an investigation after receiving a complaint from the EU producers concerned, but it can also do so on its own initiative. A subsidy is a financial contribution from a government or public body which, in the case of trade, affects the pricing of goods imported into the EU. The EU may impose duties to neutralize the benefit of such a subsidy on imported goods when the subsidy is limited to a specific industry or group of industries. Safeguards are intended for situations in which an EU industry is affected by an unforeseen, sharp and sudden increase of imports. The objective is to give the industry a temporary breathing space to make necessary adjustments. In this paper, Chapter Ⅱ examines the trade defence instruments in the EU. Chapter Ⅲ shows major trends in the use of trade defence measures taken by EU.

WTO 보조금협정상 보조금의 정의

李桓圭(Lee Hwan-Gyu) 미국헌법학회 2010 美國憲法硏究 Vol.21 No.2

WTO rules on subsidies contained in the SCMA are intended to impose disciplines on the granting by public authorities to industry of economic support that may negatively affect international trade. However, not every public subsidy is regarded as capable of distorting international trade. Subsidies assist sovereign governments in accomplishing their domestic economic, regional and social policies and may often be aimed at assisting a country's industrial competitiveness in the international economy. The Uruguay Round of multilateral trade negotiations which ended in 1994 resulted in the adoption of the SCMA, among the other multilateral WTO agreements. The SCMA gave the first definition of the term subsidy which is still valid today. The purpose of art 1.1 SCMA is to provide a definition of a subsidies to be applied throughout the SCMA and the other WTO agreement relating to trade in goods. The definition in art. 1.1 SCMA sets out two distinct whilst necessary elements for a subsidy to exist: (1) there must be a financial contribution by a government or a public body within the territory of a WTO Member and (2) such a financial contribution should confer a benefit. This article will analyze the definition of a subsidy under SCMA, comparing with US and EU countervailing duty law. And it will help us to solve the problems with regard to countervailing measures.

미국의 반덤핑조치에 대한 대응방안 연구

이환규(Lee, Hwan-Gyu) 미국헌법학회 2012 美國憲法硏究 Vol.23 No.3

In recent years antidumping has been catapulted to the forefront of most controversial practices in international trade. Broadly defined, dumping is international price discrimination. It occurs when an exporter in the importing country sells product at a price below that at which it sells like product in its domestic market. Under U.S. law, dumping occurs when subject product is imported into the United States and sold at less than fair value. The administration of U.S. antidumping law is shared between the U.S. Department of Commerce(USDOC) and the U.S. International Trade Commission(USITC). USDOC’s task is to determines whether dumped imports cause a material injury to a domestic industry which produces a like product. The recent data shows that U.S. has frequently relied on antidumping measures to restrict imports from foreign countries and protect domestic industries. Korea is one of major countries whose goods are most affected by USA’s antidumping measures. To minimize our industry’s affection, we have to prepare countermeasures against U.S.A.’s antidumping measures. This article suggests our countermeasures against USA’s antidumping measures. In this paper, Chapter Ⅱ examines the procedures of dumping in U.S. Chapter Ⅲ shows major trends in the use of antidumping measures taken by U.S. Finally, countermeasures of Korea against USA’s antidumping measures will be presented.

미국의 무역구제제도 연구

이환규(Lee, Hwan-Gyu) 미국헌법학회 2014 美國憲法硏究 Vol.25 No.1

Trade remedies are to secure fair trade and to remedy injuries of domestic industries caused by opening market. However, the recent data shows that U.S. has frequently relied on trade defence measures to restrict imports from foreign countries and protect domestic industries. Korea is one of major countries whose goods are most affected by USAs trade defence measures, including antidumping measures, countervailing measures and safeguard measures. To minimize our industrys affection, we have to prepare countermeasures against USA.s trade defence measures. This article suggests our countermeasures against USAs trade defence measures. In this paper, Chapter Ⅱ examines the trade remedies in U.S. Chapter Ⅲ shows major trends in the use of trade defence measures taken by U.S. Finally, countermeasures of Korea against USAs trade defence measures will be presented.

미국 통상법상 도피조항의 실체적 요건

이환규(Lee, Hwan-Gyu) 미국헌법학회 2011 美國憲法硏究 Vol.22 No.2

This article discusses the escape clause in US Trade Law which effects Article ⅩⅨ of the GATT and the WTO Safeguard Agreement. The modern era of safeguards measures stems from the beginning of the United States Reciprocal Trade Agreements program of its 1934 acts. The history of the US safeguards provisions reveals a series of changes in response to different economic environments. At the times of economic expansion, the conditions for a safeguard measure were tightened to make the grant of import restraint more difficult. When the economy experienced intense foreign competition and a downturn recession, changes were made to ease conditions for the application of safeguards. Now the United States implements import relief under Section 201 of the Trade Act of 1974 in accordance with Article ⅩⅨ of the GATT and the WTO Safeguard Agreement. Under Section 201(a), a safeguard measure is applicable where an article is being imported into the United States in such increased quantities as to be a substantial cause of serious injury, or the threat thereof, to the domestic industry producing an article like or directly competitive with the imported article.

美國 相計關稅法上 特定性의 原則

이환규(Lee Hwan gyu) 법무부 국제법무정책과 2002 통상법률 Vol.- No.47

EU에서의 교토메커니즘의 이행

이환규(Lee Hwan Gyu) 한국국제경제법학회 2010 국제경제법연구 Vol.8 No.2

온실가스의 의무감축과 교토메커니즘을 주요 내용으로 하는 교토의정서가 EU의 주도적인 노력으로 발효되었다는 점과 EU가 교토의정서에 따른 1차 의무이행 기간 이전인 2005년 배출권거래제를 시작한 것은 EU가 기후변화정책에 있어서 중요한 역할을 수행하고 있다는 것을 보여주고 있다. 또한, EU는 교토의정서에 따른 1차 의무이행 기간 이후에도 기후보호 대책을 지속적으로 강구하면서 온실가스감축조치를 강화시켜 나가고 있다. 이미 2020년까지 1990년 대비 30-40%의 온실가스감축 목표를 수립하였는데 다른 국가들이 상응한 조치를 취할 경우 이 목표치를 상향조정할 계획이기도 하다. 교토의정서는 감축목표를 달성하는 비용을 최소화하기 위하여 시장에 기초한 신축성 메커니즘을 도입하였는데, 배출권거래제도, 청정개발체제, 공동이행제도 등 세 가지 국제협력 수단을 교토메커니즘이라고 한다. 본 논문은 교토메커니즘의 이행의 모범이 되고 있는 EU의 배출권거래제도, 개발체제, 공동이행제도 등에 대해 살펴보았다. 특히, EU의 배출권거래제도의 내용과 개정지침을 중심으로 분석하였다. EU played a key role in ratification of the Kyoto Protocol. And the entering into force of the EU's emissions trading system in 2005 even before the first commitment period of Kyoto Protocol illustrates the significant role played by the EU in terms of climate change policy. EU has been continuously strengthening measures for further reduction of greenhouse gas emissions even after the first commitment period of Kyoto Protocol was over. EU already have set a goal of 30-40% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 compared with 1990 levels in case other countries should take similar measures. Under the Kyoto Protocol, Parties may use the following three market-based mechanism to lower the overall costs of achieving emission targets: Emissions Trading System, Clean Development Mechanism, and Joint Implementation. This article analyses the implementation of Kyoto Mechanism In Europe, and focuses on the EU-ETS and amending Directives.