산업 분쟁에서의 국제 중재 판정 연구 : 미국의 승인·집행과 불편한 법정의 법리를 중심으로 = A Study on the Recognition and Enforcement of International Arbitration Awards and the Doctrine of Forum Non Conveniens in Industrial Disputes in the United States

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

This study analyzes the recognition and enforcement of international arbitration awards and the doctrine of forum non conveniens in the United States, and then compares them with Korean law. When a dispute in an international transaction develops into a lawsuit, the issue of determining the applicable law to be applied to the case and the issue of international jurisdiction regarding which country's court will hear the case are frequently raised. However, since international private law is not internationally unified, the determination of the applicable law may vary depending on the determination of jurisdiction, and as a result, the court's judgment may also vary. Therefore, the parties filing a lawsuit often adopt the so-called 'forum shopping' strategy of filing a lawsuit in a court of a country where the law that can obtain a favorable judgment result is likely to be selected as the applicable law. In order to respond to such forum shopping, the common law of Anglo-American case law has long established the ‘doctrine of forum non conveniens’. In other words, forum non conveniens is a mostly common law legal doctrine through which a court acknowledges that another forum or court where the case might have been brought is a more appropriate venue for a legal case, and dismisses the case. In Korea, article 2, Paragraph 1 of the revised international private law states that “the court has international jurisdiction when the parties or the matter in dispute have a substantial connection with the Republic of Korea. In this case, the court only established a general provision that “in determining the presence or absence of a substantial connection, the court shall follow reasonable principles that are consistent with the idea of distributing international jurisdiction,” and after much debate, it was decided to postpone the introduction of the doctrine of inconvenient forum. Accordingly, the applicability of the doctrine of inconvenient forum under the current interpretation of international private law was left to case law and academic theory.