컨벤션 서비스 실패와 회복에 따른 신뢰, 전환행동과 충성도 연구

유현경,윤유식 한국호텔관광학회 2015 호텔관광연구 Vol.17 No.2

This study was undertaken to investigate the influence of convention services failure and recovery on switching behavior and trust, as well as the influence of convention trust and switching behavior on loyalty. For the purpose of this study, the data were collected from convention participants in COEX and Kintex. 307 questionnaires were used as valid samples to analyze for the research. The results of the study show that convention services failure and recovery influence switching behavior and trust. Especially when there are failures in employee responses to customer requests and service environment, participants tend to attend different convention. However, findings reveal that even after the service recovery, participants are likely to show behavioral intention of searching for different convention. Moreover, convention services failure reduces the trust level in convention, and services failure in employee responses to customer requests decreases the trust level the most. On the other hand, convention services recovery showed significant positive impact on trust in convention. It is also found that action-oriented responses from the service provider are likely to increase the trust level in particular. Furthermore, convention trust also had positive impact on loyalty, and had a relatively high explanation. The results provided useful implications for convention industry to develop a service marketing plan for future convention participants.

법학적 관행 이론 소묘(素描) ―관행의 규범성에 대한 다각적 고찰을 중심으로―

이현경 한국법철학회 2017 법철학연구 Vol.20 No.3

Convention is the equilibrium agreed upon by reasonable subjects facing common problems that need coordination or cooperation through practical reasoning process, an implicit normative order which is formed through the social interaction among the actors without explicit consent or agreement and is persistent autonomously. Previous theories on social conventions can be categorized into three approaches, namely: (i) the ‘coordination solution model’ of Hume and Lewis, (ii) the ‘alternative model’ which has emerged based on a rejection of Lewis’ fundamental premises, (iii) and the ‘multi-layered alternative model’ of Marmor. The author indicates that previously existing main theories on convention have, in spite of various merits, certain problems and limits on two dimensions: namely, the dimension of a ‘general theory’ on social conventions, and the dimension of a ‘legal theory’ thereon. In the former sense they cannot appropriately grasp the ‘dynamic and complex’ nature of conventions, whereas they fail to elucidate the ‘normativity’ of convention in the latter sense. In order to overcome these defects of the existing theories, the author claims for the eventual necessity to formulate an ‘alternative legal convention theory’. The alternative theory includes a reconstruction of the concept of ‘legal convention’, and has as its constructive elements the elucidation of the dynamics and complexity of convention, and normativity of convention. In this article, the author focus on elucidating the normaitivity of convention in multiple perspective, based on three different dimensions of discourse on normativity; ① ‘conceptual analysis’, ② ‘justification’, ③ ‘evaluation’. As an conceptual analysis, the author reconstruct the concept of ‘legal convention’, which contain the dynamic and intrinsic normative nature of convention on the premise of ‘convention as norm’.(‘legal convention formula’) In the latter part of the paper, the author investigates the normativity of conventions, arguing against two kinds of skeptics and its evaluational function which tries to solve the problem of ‘bad convention’. The author insist following three main thesis, distinguishing between ‘ontological normativity’ and ‘evaluative normativity’, (1) ‘normative hierarchy of convention’, (2) ‘presumptive validity thesis’, (3) ‘multiple justification argument’. The author claim that genuine conventions which satisfy the alternative convention formula should be respected. Since the convention has a presumptive validity, we have prima facie obligation to conform to it.(‘presumptive validity thesis’) However, so called ‘bad conventions’, different from pointless conventions, loosen their presumptive legitimacy, and then, we don’t have any general obligation to obey it. The author explains the meaning of ‘bad convention’ and gives several criterion to judge it, in a evaluative normativitiy dimension. 본고는 관행(convention)을 본격적인 법적 문제로 다루고, 이를 위한 분석틀을 제시하는 체계적인 ‘법학적 관행 이론’ 정립을 목표로 한다. 오늘날 관행은 사회·문화적 영역을 넘어 법적 장(場)의 한가운데 들어와 있다. 관행과 관련된 사회 문제가 사법적 분쟁으로 비화되기도 하고, 이를 입법적으로 해결하기 위해 법제화가 추진된다. 그럼에도 불구하고 정작 관행 그 자체에 대한 체계적인 법이론적 탐구는 거의 찾아보기 어렵다. 이러한 문제의식 하에, 필자는 법학적 관행 이론을 규범성 담론의 세 차원―개념분석·정당화·평가―을 중심으로 세 단계로 구성하고자 한다. 첫 번째 단계인 ‘개념분석적 차원’에서는 우선 ‘관행성’의 본질을 규명한 후, 기존의 사회적 관행 이론들의 한계를 보완하고 ‘법적’ 특수성을 반영한 대안적인 ‘법적 관행’ 개념을 정립한다(‘법적 관행 정식’). 두 번째 단계인 ‘정당화 차원’에서는 관행이 갖는 규범성의 특징을 밝히고, 규범성의 원천 및 효력 근거를 고찰한다(‘관행의 규범적 위계’ 및 ‘다층적 정당화 논변’). 마지막 세 번째 단계인 ‘평가적 차원’에서는 소위 ‘나쁜 관행’의 문제를 소재로 삼아, 그것의 논리적 가능성과 의미, 심사 기준 및 해결 방안을 논한다(‘관행존중의 원칙’ 및 ‘추정적 효력테제’). 이러한 탐구를 통해 필자가 법학적 관행 이론의 각 단계별로 도출하는 결론을 요약하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 관행 정식을 충족한 진성 관행은 특별한 종류의 규범이다[1단계: 개념분석적 차원(Ⅱ)]. 둘째, 관행은 규범적 위계를 가지며, 관행 규범성의 원천(源泉)은 다층적 논변으로 정당화될 수 있다[2단계: 정당화 차원(Ⅲ)]. 셋째, 진성 관행은 추정적 효력이 있지만, ‘나쁜 관행’의 경우에는 그 효력이 부인되며 일반적 준수 의무가 없다[3단계: 평가적 차원(Ⅳ)]. 본고의 법학적 관행 이론은 일차적으로는 실정법학이나 법실무에 적용 가능한 실천 이론이기를 지향하지만, 동시에 대안적인 ‘법철학적 법관행주의’ 구상을 위한 토대로서도 중요한 의미를 갖는다.

조정 관행의 개념적 구조와 요소 ―관행 개념 재구성과 대안 이론을 위한 분석적 기초―

이현경 한국법철학회 2017 법철학연구 Vol.20 No.1

Conventions are very significant in legal theory and legal practice, as well as in our ordinary civic life. Nevertheless, jurisprudential research on the concept, nature, validity, and legal implications, of convention has not been done enough. Previous theories on social conventions can be categorized into three approaches, namely: (i) the ‘coordination solution model’ of Hume and Lewis which sees convention as a solution for coordination, (ii) the ‘alternative model’ which has emerged based on a rejection of Lewis’ fundamental premises, (iii) and the ‘multi-layered alternative model’ of Marmor which accepts the Lewisian coordination convention but proceeds to suggest a new type of understanding which Lewis fails to explain. Among these theories, based on the ‘coordination solution model’ which is considered to be the standard explanation to conventions, this article attempts to analyse the conceptual structure and elements of coordination convention. The coordination convention consists of (i) coordination as the ‘situation factor’, (ii) the ‘solution factor’ which is the normative response thereto, (iii) and the ‘interaction factor’. Among these, this article concentrates on (i) and (ii) to analyse the conceptual structure of convention. And thereupon, the author indicates that the existing models on coordination convention have, in spite of various merits, certain problems and limits on two dimensions: namely, the dimension of a ‘general theory’ on social conventions, and the dimension of a ‘legal theory’ thereon. In the former sense they cannot appropriately grasp the ‘dynamic and complex’ nature of conventions, whereas they fail to elucidate the ‘normativity’ of convention in the latter sense. In order to overcome these defects of the existing theories, the author claims for the eventual necessity to formulate an ‘alternative legal convention theory’. The alternative theory includes a reconstruction of the concept of ‘legal convention’, and has as its constructive elements the elucidation of the (i) dynamism (dynamics of convention), (ii) complexity (ecology of convention), and (iii) normativity (normative science of convention) which social conventions have. The analysis of the conceptual structure and elements of conventions in this article will contribute to the analytic foundation to formulate an alternative legal theory on conventions. 관행은 일반시민들의 법생활뿐 아니라 법이론과 법실무에 있어서도 매우 중요한 역할을 한다. 그러나 관행의 개념과 본성, 그리고 효력과 법적 위상 등에 대한 본격적인 법철학적 연구는 충분하지 못한 실정이다. 사회적 관행에 대한 기존의 연구는 크게 세 흐름으로 정리될 수 있다. ① 관행을 조정 문제에 대한 해결책으로 정의하는 입장(흄-루이스의 ‘조정 해법 모델’), ② 루이스의 기본 전제를 거부하며 등장한 대안적 접근들(‘대항 모델’)이 있다. 그리고 ③ 루이스적 조정 관행을 수용하면서도 그 이론이 설명하지 못하는 새로운 관행 유형을 제시한 마머의 보완적인 관행 이론(‘복합 모델’)이 있다. 본고에서는 그 중 가장 표준적인 설명으로 이해되는 ‘조정 해법 모델’을 중심으로 조정 관행의 개념적 구조와 요소를 분석한다. 조정 관행 모델은 ① ‘상황 요소’로서 조정 문제와 ② 그에 대한 규범적 응답의 일종인 ‘해법 요소’, 그리고 ③ ‘상호작용 요소’로 구성된다. 이 중 본고에서는 ‘상황 요소’와 ‘해법 요소’를 중심으로 관행의 개념적 구조를 분석한다. 이러한 분석을 통해 필자는 기존의 조정 관행 모델은 여러 장점들에도 불구하고 두 차원―사회적 관행에 관한 ‘일반 이론’의 차원과 ‘법이론’의 차원―에서 문제점과 한계를 갖는다고 지적한다. 전자는 관행에 대한 경직된 관념과 정적인 접근에 머묾으로써 관행의 ‘역동성과 복잡성’을 적절히 포착하지 못하는 점, 후자는 특히 관행의 ‘규범성’을 충분히 해명하지 못함을 의미한다. 기존의 조정 관행 이론들이 갖는 이러한 결함을 극복하기 위해 필자는 궁극적으로 ‘대안적인 법학적 관행 이론’ 정립이 필요하다고 주장한다. 대안 이론은 ‘법적 관행’ 개념 재구성을 포함하며, 나아가 ‘관행의 역동성’(관행 동학), ‘관행의 복잡성’(관행 생태학), 그리고 ‘관행의 규범성’(관행 규범학) 해명이라는 세 가지 점을 구성적 요소로 갖는다. 관행의 개념적 구조와 요소를 분석한 본고의 탐구는 이러한 대안적인 법학적 관행 이론 구축을 위한 분석적 기초를 마련하는데 기여할 수 있을 것이다.

A Comparative Study on International Convention and National Legislation Relating to the Liability of the Air Carrier

이강빈 한국무역상무학회 2008 貿易商務硏究 Vol.40 No.-

The purpose of this paper is to review the text of national legislation relating to the carrier’s liability in respect of the carriage of passengers, baggage and cargo by air in major states such as United Kingdom, Germany, France, Canada, Russia and China, and to compare the air carrier’s liability under the national legislations of above states with them under the Warsaw System relating to the international carriage by air. Also this paper reviews the text of the draft legislation relating to the carrier’s liability in respect of the carriage by air in Korea. The Warsaw Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules Relating to International Carriage was adopted in 1929. In 1999, the ICAO adopted the Montreal Convention for the Unification of Certain Rules for International Carriage by Air vastly modernizing the unification of private air law. The Montreal Convention replaced the instruments of the“Warsaw System”, and came into force on 4 November 2003. The Montreal Convention is not only an international convention. It has also exercised a considerable influence on national legislation. A number of states have adopted into their legislation the entire text of the Convention, or certain of its principles, with the object of regulating their national air transport. The main feature of the liability regime of the air carrier under the Montreal Convention is the two-tier liability system for death or injury of the passenger with strict liability up to 100,000 SDR and presumptive liability with a reversed burden of proof without any limit above that threshold. The principles of the liability of the air carrier under the Montreal Convention have been adopted into national legislations by the United Kingdom, Germany, France, Canada, Russia and China. Now the Ministry of Justice of Korea is proceeding to make a new national legislation relating to the liability of the air carrier in respect of the carriage by air. The draft legislation of the Part VI the Carriage by Air of the Commercial Code of Korea has adopted the main principles of the liability of the air carrier under the Montreal Convention. In conclusion, the national legislation relating to the liability of the air carrier in Korea will contribute to settle efficiently the dispute on the carrier's liability in respect of the carriage of passengers, baggage and cargo by air.

국제아동탈취의 민사적 측면에 관한 헤이그협약과 한국의 가입

석광현 ( Kwang Hyun Suk ) 서울대학교 법학연구소 2013 서울대학교 法學 Vol.54 No.2

부모의 일방 기타 가까운 가족이 하는 유괴를 아동의 탈취(child abduction)라고 부른다. 헤이그국제사법회의는 국제적으로 불법 탈취된 아동의 신속한 반환을 실현 하기 위하여 1980년 “국제적 아동탈취의 민사적 측면에 관한 협약”(“탈취협약”)을 성안하였다. 탈취협약은 약식의 사실확인에 기초한 절차를 통하여 불법 탈취된 아동의 신속한 반환(즉 원상회복)과 면섭교섭권을 보장하고 어느 체약국법에 기한 양육권 및 면접교섭권이 다른 체약국에서 존중되도록 보장한다. 탈취협약은 중앙당국 간의 국제공조제도와, 법원 또는 행정당국에 의한 아동반환의 메커니즘을 구축하는 혼합 체계(mixed system)를 취하고 있다. 탈취협약은 UN의 1989년 “아동의 권리에 관한 협약(Convention on the Rights of the Child. CRC)”에 규정된 아동의 기본권의 실현을 돕는 것이다. 정부는 2012년 12월 탈취협약에 가입함으로써 89번째 체약국이 되었고 탈취협약은 2013. 3. 1. 우리나라에서 발효되었다. 국회는 탈취협약 가입을 위하여 2012. 12. 11. “헤이그 국제아동탈취협약 이행에 관한 법률”(“이행법률”)을 제정하였다. 필자는 탈취협약 가입을 환영한다. 헤이그국제사법회의는 1999년 이래 탈취협약의 일관된 해석과 효율적 운영을 촉진하고자 탈취협약의 적용사례에 관한 정보를 제공하는 데이터베이스, 즉 “The International Child Abduction Database(INCADAT)”를 운영하고 있다. 구체적으로 이 글에서는 탈취협약의 주요내용(Ⅱ.), 이행법률의 주요내용(Ⅲ.)을 살펴보고, 탈취협약이 적용되지 않는 경우 아동의 반환과 면접교섭권의 확보에 관한 우리 국내법(Ⅳ.), 국제가사소송?비송법제의 정비(Ⅴ.)와 관련 형사문제(Ⅵ.)를 논의한다. 특히 장래 논란의 대상이 될 탈취협약(제12조, 제20조와 제13조)상의 반환거부사유를 주의 깊게 검토할 필요가 있다. Kidnapping of a child by one of the parents or a close relative is called “child abduction”, as opposed to a classic kidnapping conducted by a person who is not related at all to the child. In order to ensure the prompt return of a wrongfully abducted child under such child abduction, the Hague Conference on Private International Law (“Hague Conference”) adopted in 1980 “the Convention on the Civil Aspects of International Child Abduction” (“Convention”). The objects of the Convention are twofold: first, the Convention is to secure the prompt return of children wrongfully removed to or retained in any Contracting State; and second, the Convention is to ensure the rights of custody and of access under the law of a Contracting State are effectively respected in the other Contracting States. The Convention adopts the so-called “mixed system” in that it combines the international assistance among central authorities and the return of children by courts or administrative authorities. The Convention is one of the means to achieve the fundamental rights of children protected under the United Nations` “Convention on the Rights of the Child” of 1989. In December of 2012, Korea has become the 89 th Contracting State to the Convention and the Convention has taken effect on March 1, 2013 in Korea. In December of 2012, the National Assembly of Korea has enacted the “Act implementing the Hague Child Abduction Convention” (“Implementation Act”). First of all, the author welcomes Korea`s accession to the Convention. Since 1999, the Hague Conference is operating “The International Child Abduction Database (INCADAT)” to ensure uniform interpretation and the efficient operation of the Convention by providing information on cases which have applied the Convention. The author deals with the following issues: major contents of the Convention (Chapter II), major contents of the Implementation Act (Chapter III), the Korean domestic law on return of children and establishment of right of access (Chapter IV), future streamlining of international family and non-contentions litigation (Chapter V) and the criminal law issues related to wrongfully abducted children (Chapter VI). In particular, the grounds on which return of children can be refused under the Convention in Articles 12, 13 and 20 should be reviewed carefully because those will be controversial subjects in the Korean courts in the future.

선박경매에 관한 베이징협약 연구 Ⅰ - 협약의 적용범위와 경매통고를 중심으로

권창영 한국민사집행법학회 2023 民事執行法硏究 : 韓國民事執行法學會誌 Vol.19 No.1

As international trade increases, there are many cases where public auctions are held in Korean courts against foreign ships. At this time, the content and order of rights under the substantive law are in principle in accordance with Article 94 of the International Private Act, and the procedure of judicial sale of ships is in accordance with the law of State of judicial sale. However, since each State has different substantive laws or procedural laws on the judicial sale of ship, it depends on each State's policy whether the State of registration or third State will approve the judicial sale results of the State of judicial sale. When a judicial sale is terminated, the purchaser acquires clean title of the ship without mortgage and charge, and the effect must be recognized not only in the State of judicial sale but also in other States to achieve the purpose fully. From May 2007, after passing through Comité Maritime International, UNCITRAL drafted ‘the Convention on the International Effects of Judicial Sales of Ships’(‘Beijing Convention’). The UN General Assembly adopted the above agreement on December 7, 2022 and approved the signing ceremony of the agreement to be held in Beijing in 2023 as much as possible. Pursuant to Article 21 (1) of the Convention, the above Convention shall enter into force 180 days after the date of the deposit of the third instrument of ratification, acceptance, approval or accession. Since there are many States that actively want to ratify the Convention, including China, Switzerland, the requirements for the entering into force of the Convention are expected to be easily met. It is desirable for Korea to ratify the Beijing Convention because it can achieve international unity in various matters such as protecting the rights of interested parties, handling ship registration, and protecting the status of purchaser. This essay is an overview of Articles 1 to 4 of the Convention, focusing on the scope of application of the Convention and the notice of judicial sale. The Convention applies when the purchaser acquires clean title as a result of the judicial sale of ships. ‘Clean title’ refers to ownership without any mortgage and charge. The Convention only stipulates the international effect of the judicial sale of ships, but excludes judicial sale procedures made in the law of State of judicial sale, such as decisions made by the court regarding the process of the judicial sale. The Convention applies only to the judicial sale of ships if (i) the judicial sale is conducted in a State Party; and (ii) the ship is physically within the territory of the State of judicial sale at the time of that sale. The term ‘at the time of that sale’ should be interpreted as ‘from the time of the decision to commence the judicial sale until the purchaser fully pays the successful bid price’. Article 4 of the Convention stipulates the notice of judicial sale. The notice is only part of the judicial sale procedure, but it is a very important means of protecting the rights of creditors who cannot participate in the auction unless they are notified. The ‘notice of judicial sale’ is not an independent obligation, but functions as a requirement for the issuance of the certificate of judicial sale prescribed in Article 5 of the Convention. The persons to be notified are the registry, mortgage holder, registered charge holder, maritime lien holder who reported the right, the owner of the ship for the time being, registered bareboat charterer and the bareboat charter registry. The notice of judicial sale shall be given in accordance with the law of the State of judicial sale, and in Korea, it is based on the method of service. The notice of judicial sale shall contain, as a minimum, the information mentioned in annex I. The notice shall be published by announcement in the press or other publication available in the State of judicial sale. In addition, the notice shall be transmitted to the re... 국제교역의 증가에 따라 외국선박에 대하여 우리나라 법원에서 경매가 진행되는 경우가 적지 않다. 이때 실체법상 권리의 내용과 순위는 국제사법 제94조에 따라 원칙적으로 선적국법에 의하고, 선박경매절차는 법정지법에 의하게 된다. 그런데 선박집행에 관한 각국의 실체법이나 절차법이 서로 다르기 때문에 법정지의 경매결과를 선적국이나 제3국이 승인할 것인지 여부는 각국의 정책에 달려있다. 선박경매가 종료된 경우 매수인이 선박에 관하여 부담 없는 완전한 소유권을 취득하고, 그 효과가 경매를 실시한 국가만이 아니라 다른 나라에서도 인정되어야만 그 목적을 온전히 달성할 수 있다. 2007. 5.부터 국제해법회(Comité Maritime International)를 거쳐, 국제상거래법위원회(UNCITRAL)에서 선박경매의 국제적 효력에 관한 협약 초안을 성안하였다. UN 총회는 2022. 12. 7. 위 협약안을 채택하면서, 가능한 한 2023년 베이징에서 협약 서명식을 열도록 인가하였다. 협약 제21조 제1항에 따라 위 협약은 세 번째 비준서, 수락서, 승인서 또는 가입서가 기탁된 날로부터 180일이 경과한 이후 발효하게 된다. 중국, 스위스를 비롯하여 협약을 적극적으로 비준하려는 국가가 많기 때문에, 위 협약의 발효요건은 쉽게 충족될 것으로 예상된다. 베이징협약을 비준하면, 이해관계인의 권리보호, 선박등기의 처리, 매수인의 지위 보호 등 여러 가지 사항에서 국제적 통일성을 기할 수 있으므로, 우리나라도 위 협약을 비준하는 것이 바람직하다. 이 글은 협약 제1조부터 제4조까지 개관하면서, 협약의 적용범위와 경매통고를 중심으로 연구한 것이다. 협약은 선박경매 결과 매수인이 부담 없는 완전한 소유권을 취득하는 경우에 적용된다. ‘부담 없는 완전한 소유권’은 일체의 저당권 및 물적 부담이 존재하지 않는 소유권을 말한다. 협약은 선박경매의 국제적 효력에 관하여 규정할 뿐, 선박경매절차나 선박경매절차 진행과 관련하여 법원이 한 결정과 같이 법정지법에서 이루어지는 경매절차에 대하여는 규율대상에서 제외하고 있다. 협약은 (i) 경매가 회원국에서 실시되었을 것, (ii) 선박이 경매 당시 선박경매국의 영역 내에 현존하고 있을 것의 요건을 충족하는 선박경매에 한하여 적용된다. ‘경매 당시’란 ‘경매개시결정 시부터 매각대금이 모두 지급될 때까지’를 의미하는 것으로 해석하여야 한다. 협약 제4조는 경매통고에 관하여 규정하고 있다. 경매통고는 경매절차의 일부분에 불과하지만, 통고를 받지 못하면 경매에 참여할 수 없는 채권자에게는 권리를 보호하는 데 매우 중요한 수단이 된다. 경매통고는 독립된 의무가 아니라 협약 제5조에서 정하는 선박경매증서의 발급을 위한 요건으로 기능한다. 통고를 받을 자는 등기소, 저당권자, 등기된 물적 부담권자, 권리를 신고한 선박우선특권자, 통고 당시의 선박소유자, 선체용선자 및 용선등기소이다. 경매통고는 선박집행국의 법률에 의하여 이루어지는데, 우리나라의 경우에는 송달의 방식에 의한다. 통고 내용은 협약 별지 1에서 자세히 규정하고 있다. 통고는 신문 또는 선박경매국 내에서 접근 가능한 그 밖의 출판물을 통해 공고하여야 한다. 또한 통고는 협약 제11조에서 정한 공시위탁기구에 전송하여 공시하도록 하였다.

‘국제물품매매에 있어서의 대리에 관한 협약(1983년)’의 재조명

이지민 국제거래법학회 2011 國際去來法硏究 Vol.20 No.2

The Convention on Agency in the International Sale of Goods (Geneva Convention)is the first uniform law governing the law of agency in the international perspective. Though the Geneva Convention was adopted about 28 years ago, this convention has not yet been entered into force. However, the Geneva Convention is still important as any uniform law project in the law of agency will make reference to this convention. Also, the Geneva Convention aims at supplementing the United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods (CISG), which is adopted by countries that account for over two-thirds of all international sale of goods. As use of an agent in the international transaction is unavoidable, to promote active international transactions, we need not only CISG but also a uniform law in the law of agency. Thus, more research on the Geneva Convention is needed. Korea has not ratified the Geneva Convention. When comparing the Geneva Convention to the Korean Civil Law in respect of ‘regulation of internal and external relation’,‘establishment of agent’s authority’, ‘legal effects of agent’s act’, ‘ratification’,‘right of action to the principal or the third party in case of indirect agency’ and ‘termination of agency’, though the concept of agency in Geneva Convention, which includes both direct and indirect agency, is different from that of the Korean Civil Law, there is not much difference as an outcome. Thus, ratification of the Geneva Convention would not create huge conflict with the Korean Civil Law.

New Warsaw Convention: Montreal Convention 1999 소개

김종복 ( Kim Jong Bog ) 한국항공우주정책·법학회 2003 한국항공우주정책·법학회지 Vol.17 No.-

The Warsaw Convention of 1929 and the amendments thereto including the Hague Protocol, Montreal Protocols Nos. 1,2,3 and 4. the Guadalajara Convention and the IATA Intercarrier Agreements, which are the rules (as called Warsaw System) Agreements, which are the rules (as called Warsaw System) have played as a major rule in the international air transportation for more than 70 years, will be replaced by the Montreal Convention of 1999 for its effectiveness on November 4, 2003. While a major portion of the Montreal Convention follows the language of the Warsaw System, the Montreal Convention makes significant changes to the scope and extent of the carrier`s liability, expands the jurisdictions where the carrier can be sued, and recognized the effect of code sharing on air carrier liability. The Montreal Convention heralds the single biggest change in the international aviation since the diplomatic efforts in the mid-1920`s which resulted in the enactment of the Warsaw Convention. Until now, the legal liability of almost all the international air carriers has been governed by the Wwarsaw System. The Montreal Convention incorporates provisions of these instruments to create a single document and to set a uniform regime for carrier liability in international transportation. At the same time the issue of the low liability limits of the Warsaw has been resolved to a more satisfactory level in the Montreal Convention. The Convention has been hailed as consumer friendly and progressive in nature. If this Convention is ratified by Korea, the virtual elimination of the liability limits between passengers and the airlines will become law by treaty. The airlines in Korea as well as Korean consumers of international air carriage will immensely benefit from the ratification. As opposed to the Warsaw Convention, the Montreal Convention has been described to be the one that is no longer a Convention for airlines, but it would serve the interests of both the consumers and the air carriers.

대한민국에서의 헤이그관할합의협약 채택방안 -2019년 재판협약 성립을 계기로 돌아본 의의와 과제-

장준혁 안암법학회 2020 안암 법학 Vol.0 No.61

The 2005 Convention on Choice of Court Agrements was negotiated as a standard “double convention” in the midst of a dim prospect of even a modest form of a double convention, i.e., “mixed convention”. This was made posible by providing for a consensual choice of court as the sole jurisdictional basis in the Convention. This compromise solution worked to kep the Judgments Project alive. The Choice of Court Convention is also notable as a treaty that paralels the 1958 New York Convention on the Recogniton and Enforcement of Foreign Arbitral Awards. While the Choice of Court Convention may ofer scarce inovation for the European Union, this Convention ilustrates how a worldwide convention can focus on a moderate level of unifcation and integration which can be shared more broadly. This experience ofers a model for the future, of having a substantively advanced European legislation and a broadly manageable Hague Convention side by side. In line with the 1958 New York Convention, the Choice of Court Convention presents some notable features. First, Articles 5(a), proviso, 6(a) 9(a) adopt the same conflict-of-laws rules on the valid constiution of a choice of court agrement, in a uniform way. Second, Article 9(a), proviso adopts an inovative aproach to make the isuing court's positve determination of this isue bind the State requested. Third, the rendering court's finding of the facts constiuting a jurisdictional basis binds the requested State. Article 8(2). First, a purely internal situation is, in principle, made subject to a choice of court agrement in international scale. While Article 1(2) excludes from the Convention a situation which is purely internal to a Contracting State, it is rather an exception than a rule. Second, even an exclusive choice of court in international scale is alowed, even if the chosen forum has no other conection to the parties or the dispute. The Convention only provides for a situation which is purely internal to a "Contracting" State, in the exception of Article 1(2) and the declaration mechanisms under Articles 19 and 20. Third, a choice of court, where ambiguous, shal be demed an exclusive choice. This legislative technique is not ideal, but a presumption would cary with it a danger of international disharmony. Notably, this treatment aplies to both a choice of a State and that of a local court within a State, though this paralelism only aplies where the two choices were made at the same time. Fourth, Articles 5(a), proviso, 6(a) 9(a) adopt the same conflict-of-laws rules on the valid constiution of a choice of court agrement, in a uniform way. Fifth, Article 9(a), proviso adopts an inovative aproach to make the isuing court's positve determination of this isue bind the State requested. Sixth, the rendering court's finding of the facts constiuting a jurisdictional basis binds the requested State. Article 8(2). In Korea, the Convention tends to receive positve evaluations. Some of the Convention solutions are those that were already advanced in regard of national rules. The reforms adopted in the Convention receives a positve light as wel. This positve aceptance among Korean lawyers permits us to predict a smoth function of the Convention in Korea, once it becomes the law here. The Convention is also expected to exert a coresponding reform of the national rules in Korea. Idealy, the proces of ratifying the Convention and a paralel reform as made visible in Article 8 of the 2018 Reform Bil of the Private International Law could be pursued simultaneously. Becoming a Contracting State means participating in a formal international network for the recogniton and enforcement of judgments. This wil help improve the image of Korea. From a foreign country, Korea may apear to have built a barier of language around its legislation and judicial proces. This very sense of barier wil be overcome by joining a common international regime, and the trust in Korean law, instiution and practice wil gr... 2005년 관할합의협약은 ‘완화된 형태의 이중협약’ 즉 “혼합협약” 모델마저 폐기되는 분위기 속에서, 전속적 관할합의로 관할사유를 한정하는방법으로 ‘표준적인 이중협약’으로서 만들어졌다. 이 방법으로 재판 프로젝트를 연명시키면서, 1958년 뉴욕협약에 대응하는 협약을 만들었다. 그리고, 내용적으로 앞서가는 유럽연합 입법과 범용성이 높은 헤이그협약의분업이라는 작업모델을 제시한다. 한국법의 관점에서 보면, 2005년 관할합의협약은 몇 가지 혁신적인 규율을 담고 있다. 첫째, 원칙적으로 순수한 국내사안도 원칙적으로 국제재판관할합의의 대상으로 삼되, 체약국 사이에서 순수 국내사안을 빼앗지는 않도록 배려하였다. 둘째, 전속적 합의법정지와의 추가접촉 요건이 없다. 셋째, 관할합의의 취지가 불분명할 때 ‘전속적’ 관할합의로 다루도록 한다. 넷째, 관할합의의 실질적 성립․유효성에 대하여 전속적 합의법정지국법을 총괄지정하는 것으로 준거법지정규칙을 통일했다. 다섯째, 전속적 합의법정지가 관할기초사실에 대하여 내린 사실판단과, 관할합의의 실질적 성립․유효성을 긍정한 판단이 승인국을 구속하도록 했다. 여섯째, 국제관할법 규정체계 내에서 국내토지관할법도 다루는 입법추세가 반영되어 있다. 협약에 대한 국내의 평가는 긍정적이고, 국내법(자율법)의 발달에도긍정적 영향을 줄 것으로 기대된다. 실제로 2018/2020년 국제사법 개정안 제8조는 관할합의협약의 태도를 대체로 따른다. 그러므로 협약 참여와국제사법 개정을 병행 추진하는 것이 바람직하다. 서명부터 하여 참여의지를 국제적으로 천명한 뒤, 사항별 적용제외선언을 충분히 검토, 논의하여 비준하면 된다. 국가사법권 공동화의 우려나 글로벌 기업의 세계지배우려가 특히 큰 분야, 공서조항이 빈번한 원용을 가져올 만한 분야, 당사자의 진정한 합의 확보가 특히 어려운 분야, 관할합의의 유효한 성립의 저촉규정 통일과 승인법리의 확대 채용이 조심스러운 분야, 전보배상의이름 하에 과도한 배상판결이나 괴롭히기 소송이 빈발하는 분야, 대규모분쟁해결절차에서 사후적 관할합의가 체결되어 의외의 기능을 하게 되는분야 등의 가운데에서, 적용제외선언을 할 분야를 신중히 가려내면 좋을것 같다. 한편, 합의법정지와의 추가접촉을 요구할 여지를 남겨두는 선언(제19조, 제20조)은 하지 않는 것이 좋을 것이다.

베이징 항공테러협약

정진석(Chung, Chinsok),신홍균(Shin, Hong Kyun) 국제법평론회 2012 국제법평론 Vol.0 No.36

The September 11 attacks of 2001 prompted the International Civil Aviation Organization(ICAO) to address new and emerging threats to international civil aviation. In the wake of the attacks, the ICAO began a review of the existing aviation security conventions that culminated in a diplomatic conference in Beijing, China. One of the treaties adopted in Beijing is the Convention on the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Relating to International Civil Aviation (Beijing Convention). The purpose of this paper is to find how the Beijing Convention responds to the new and emerging threats. The preparatory works of the Beijing Convention and the study of its provisions show that the regulatory regime established by the Convention is more comprehensive than the existing aviation security conventions. Such comprehensiveness seems to be manifested in three points. First, the Convention has expanded the list of criminalized acts, and the newly added crimes include, inter alia, use of aircraft as weapons, chemical, biological and radioactive attacks, and acts of organizing or directing offences specified in the Convention. Second, the nature of the acts added as new crimes under the Convention resulted in the need for additional jurisdictional grounds, and the Convention introduced jurisdictional grounds which were not found in the previous aviation security conventions. Included in the new jurisdictional grounds are the nationality of the offender and the nationality of the victim. Third, the Convention has incorporated certain provisions commonly found in the more recent counterterrorism conventions concluded in the UN system. This means that, when compared with the previous aviation security conventions, the Beijing Convention has not only the characteristics of the aviation security regime but also it has the characteristics of the broader and general counter-terrorism regime.