Earticle

A lot of the issues of the elderly living alone are relevant to elder abuse. Elder abuse are also relevant to the issue of breach of the support by person who is under duty. A lot of the issues of the elderly living alone and elder mistreatment comes from the weakness effect of precious Filial Behavior culture, which we have kept unsullied in our traditional family system. The purposes of this study are to find out improvement Devices of normative system(the establishment of law for integrating) on the Support for Encouragement of Filial Behavior Act, the protection of elder abuse(elder mistreatment), the support of elderly living alone(senior citizens who live alone), the support for a provider who be good to one's parents. In addition to the global tendency of a swift rise in the aged population, the aging phenomenon of the aged population is recently showing more serious aspect. Especially only by the national financial burden of the country in the elderly welfare cost, there is a limit. So such a problem as national financial burden that can be absorbed to some extent by supporting the filial behavior home and forming society respecting or supporting the elderly institutional arrangements are needed. Only by the current Welfare of the Elderly Act cannot cope with the problem of elder abuse problems or supporting for the elderly who live alone, supporting the elderly. Systematization of integrating the Act, by the benefit and protection of the law and through separation from the Act, is needed. it is necessary to combine the current Support for Encouragement of Filial Behavior Acton with encouraging and supporting legal support to the elderly who live alone, and preventing the abuse of the elderly, supporting for a provider who be good to one's parents, and legislation creating an integrated approach is needed .

There is not a guardianship system made by contracts in existing Civil Law, but we will be able to make a contract to appoint a guardian for the purpose of preparing for the forthcoming emergencies on the basis of autonomy by establishing ‘the guardianship system’ in July 1, 2007. The revised Civil Law provide that a person who has a mental handicap caused by disease, disability, old age and so on, can make a contract to entrust another person with managing his/her assets and caring for his/her affairs and to give a power of attorney for the purpose of preparing for the forthcoming emergencies(Art. 959-14). However there are lots of problems and assignment to solve in the adult-guardianship system, e.g. the parties concerned, the three types of system, the right to consent to medical treatment, entrusting business after death with a guardian, writing a notarial deed, and so forth. For making Guardianship Contract System useful, easy and convenient for use, it is necessary to revise and make a lot of laws relevant to the system such as the Guardianship Registration Law, the Notary (Public) Act, etc.

Die Vorliegende Studie möchte den versuch unternehmen, die Auswirkungen der Annahme mit Änderungen im UN-Übereinkommen über Verträge über den internationalen Warenkauf(UN-Kaufrecht) bezüglich seines Auslegungsproblem und kollidierender allgemeiner Geschäftsbedingungen("Battle of Forms") nach Art. 19 des UN-Kaufrechts. Die Zentrale Frage für die Auslegung des Art. 19 des UN-Kaufrechts ist, ob eine Annahmeerkläung wesentlich oder nur unwesentlich von Angebot abweicht. Grundsäatzlich liegt darin eine Ablehnung des Angebots verbundenen mir einer Gegenofferte(Abs. 1). Art. 19 Abs. 1 gilt nur für wesentliche Abweichungen. Bei unwesentlichen Abweichungen stellt jedoch eine Annahme dar, wenn der Offerte nicht unverzüglich widerspricht(Abs. 2). Art. 19 Abs. 3 gibt durch eine umfangreiche beuspielhafte Aufzählung Anhalt für die Abgrenzung zwischen wesentlichen und unwesentlichen Abweichungen. Umstritten ist, ob die in Art. 19 Abs. 3 ausgeführte Abweichungen eine unwiderlegliche Vermutung der Wesentlichkeit aufstellt oder ob ein Wertungsspielraum besteht. Im Ergebnis ist der Auffassung zuzustimmen, dass Art. 19 Abs. 3 eine Auslegungsregel, von der im Einzelfall aufgrund der Umstände, Gepflogenheiten der Parteien etc abgewichen werden darf, bedeutet. Da Art. 19 Abs. 3 keine abschliessende Regelungen, Abweichungen in Punkte, die Abs, 3 nicht nennt sind auch als wesentlich oder unwesentlich einzustufen. Bezüglich kollidierender allgemeiner Geschäftsbedingungen stellt die Frage, ob und wann sie Vertragsinhalt geworden sind. Da diese Frage im im UN-Kaufrecht nicht gerelt ist, ist sie über Art. 19 zu lösen. Bei wörtlicher Anwendung des Art. 19 gelten die zuletzte übersandte allgemeiner Geschäftsbedingungen als Vertragsinhalt bei Vertragsdurchführung(Theorie des letzten Wortes; last shot rule). Daher ist die Rechtsgültigkeitslösung(knock-out rule) durch Art. 19 nicht ausgeschlossen.

근래에 들어 여러 법학자들은 특정한 국가의 헌법학이 다른 국가의 헌법학에 미치는 영향에 주목해왔다. 이들 중 일부는 특정한 국가의 헌법학은 지구촌에서 고립된 국가를 제외한 다른 국가의 헌법학에 영향을 미친다고 주장한다. 구체적으로 헌법제도나 헌법학은 폐쇄적이고 상호배타적인 존재가 아니며, 따라서 법관이나 다른 정책결정권자는 외국 헌법학으로부터 시사점을 찾거나 아니면 최소한 외국의 헌법규범이나 헌법현실로부터 일정한 영향을 받는 것이 불가피하다고 본다. 이런 관점에서 세계 각국의 헌법학은 상호간에 영향을 미칠 뿐만 아니라 점점 유사해지고, 이런 과정을 거쳐 결국에는 헌법의 보편화가 발생한다고 주장한다. 그러나 헌법의 보편화를 주장하는 견해는 다음과 같은 몇 가지 문제점을 가지고 있는 것으로 보인다. 우선 경험적인 측면에서 헌법의 보편화가 실제로 발생하고 있는 것인지, 다른 말로 헌법의 보편화를 주장하는 논거가 단순한 추정에서 비롯된 것인지 아니면 과학적 근거에 입각한 것인지가 불분명하다. 예컨대 불과 몇 십 년 전까지만 하더라도 러시아와 중국을 비롯한 여러 공산주의국가들은 권위주의적 통치를 자행했다. 또한 특정한 부분에서는 헌법의 보편화가 발생했지만 다른 부분에서는 오히려 헌법의 다양화가 발생하여 결과적으로는 헌법의 다양화로 귀결되었다고 볼 여지도 있다. 이렇게 보면 헌법의 보편화에 대한 일관된 패턴이 존재한다고 보기는 어렵다. 이 글에서는 헌법의 보편화를 주장하는 입장에서 제시하는 여러 가지 헌법의 보편화 경로를 살펴보고 이를 비판적인 관점에서 분석해보고자 한다.

These days constitutional scholars around the world have referred to the ways in which constitutional law in one country affects the advancement of constitutional law in another country. Supporters of the constitutional similarity argue that the constitutional law of one state unavoidably influences constitutional law in other states except nations that are already isolated from the world community. The society for constitutional law should be open to new ways of working. Judges, politicians and constitutional scholars can seek implication in the constitutional experiences of foreign countries. Constitutionalists who take this position are apt to think that constitutions not only influence each other but also become more similar and end up generalizing. But the argument for the constitutional similarity poses a number of questions. The major question is that it is unknown exactly whether similarity is really taking place. For example, after World War II communism gained currency in Europe and Asia. Also certain types of similarity throughout micro level have been cancelled by other types of new or continuous difference. In this sense, there is no systematic pattern of constitutional similarity. In this paper, I give an explanation to some routes to constitutional similarity and rightly criticize their normative importance.

In 2009, the Korea Supreme Court held that discontinuance of life-extending treatment can be allowed, upon reaching the stage of irrecoverable death, on the ground of the patient’s right to self decision to die based on dignity, value and the right to pursuit of happiness as a human being. The Court noted following requisites of the withholding or withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment by advanced directive for health care. First, the patient should be in the terminal condition, that will result in imminent death or has an irreversible injury or illness that results in a persistent vegetative state or permanent unconsciousness. Second, there should be patient’s advanced directive for withholding or withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment on his or her terminal condition. Third, provided medical information directly from medical provider or physician, the competent patient should execute the advance directive soberly as to the specific medical treatment based on the medical information and his own values. Fourth, The advance directive should be executed to the patient’s medical provider or patient’s attending physician and it’s existence should be clearly proved by written instructions or medical records. And last, unless the patient files a lawsuit directly in court, it is desirable that a committee composed of expert doctors, etc. decides whether the patient has reached the irrecoverable death stage. This paper notes that the third requisite of the Court for withholding or withdrawal of life-prolonging treatment may be the obstacle to be executed a valid advance directive by patient. Since, generally, prior to the patient’s terminal and irreversible condition, sufficient medical information of the patient’s irreversible injury or illness, is not provided to patient/declarant executing advance directive. This paper argues that the requisite may be fitted to the advance directive for medical treatment irrelevant to patient’s terminal condition. This paper also examines, the amended Korean Civil Code Article 947-2(effective on July.1.2013) that provides the adult guardian’s power of decision regarding personal affairs of the incompetent adult, the amended Code of Article 959-14 that provides the durable power of attorney by contract between principal and agent. The power of attorney created by principal will take effective when the principal loses capacity to decide his or her personal affairs. According to the Art. 947-2 or 959-14, this paper admits the possibility, a principal giving advance directive for health care to withhold or withdraw life-prolonging treatment. But, there is no provision immunizing criminal, civil, or professional liability of physicians or the agents who participated in advance directive regarding life-sustaining treatment. So, this paper insists to establish an Act that permits individuals to execute advance directive for health care.

대리모계약에 대한 유효성, 무효성의 논쟁은 이미 구미 제국에서는 입법적으로 해결하고 있는 나라도 있다. 우리 현행법하에서 대리모계약은 무효인가 혹은 유효인가 이에 관하여 아직까지는 열띤 논쟁이 없었고 이에 관한 학설이나 대법원의 판례도 없지만 우리나라 학자들의 지배적인 견해는 대리모계약의 효력을 부인하고 있다. 또한 세계 각국의 입법례를 통해볼 때 역시 대리모를 부인하고 있음을 알 수 있다. 그러나 우리나라는 입법적인 대책이 전혀 없는 실정이다. 그 어느 나라보다도 자에 대한 욕구가 강한 만족임을 생각할 때에 이는 상당히 심각한 문제가 아닐 수 없다. 그러나 대리모계약을 규제할 수 있는 법률이 존재하지 않는 등 기타 이유로 우리나라도 이 계약이 음성적으로 이루어지고 있으며 앞으로 법적 논쟁이 심화되어질 가능성이 예견된다. 따라서 대리모 문제를 규율하기 위한 입법이 시급히 요청이 되며, 그러한 입법이 제정됨에 있어서 고려되어야 할 몇 가지 요소에 대해 언급하고자 한다. 첫째, 대리모와 의뢰부부의 자격요건의 제한이 필요하다. 둘째, 대리모계약의 체결방식에 대한 가이드 라인이 제시되어야만 한다. 셋째, 출생자의 법적 지위가 직접 규정되어야만 한다. 마지막으로 고도의 인격적 성격을 지니는 계약임을 고려하여 해지가능성에 대한 허용 여부를 검토해야만 할 것이다.

There are already some European countries which are legislatively solving the arguments about validity or invalidity of the surrogate mother contract. Not yet in Korea have there been some serious discussions to see if the surrogate mother contract is valid or invalid under the present law systems. Also there have been little accommodated some clear scientific theory or judicial precedents about the issue. Nevertheless, the dominant view of Korean scholars seem that the surrogate mother contract is invalid. In addition, the majority of the legislation examples in various nations recognizes the invalidity of the surrogate mother. The problem is that Korea has no legislative measure against the issue. This can cause some serious problems when considering that Koreans have stronger needs for their descendents than people of any other countries. Partly because of no laws regulating the surrogate mother contract and partly because of some other reasons, the contracts are being implemented secretly in Korea, making the legal augments more serious in future. Therefore urgent request for legislation to regulate surrogate mother issues and Would like to mention on several factors that should be considered in such a law as enacted. First, surrogate mother and commissioned a couple of qualifications are needed. Second, the guidelines about how surrogate mother contract signed must be presented. Third, the legal status of persons born in direct policies should be. Finally, the highly personal nature of the contract that We will have to examine whether or not to allow for the possibility of termination.

The Military Criminal Act of Korea has been legislated in 1962. There have been 14 times of revision thereafter. These revisions were the levels modifying the terminology according to the revision of other act or adjusting the amount of sentence stipulated in the Act. Hence, the criticism for the Military Criminal Act is being presented constantly. There has been a revision for the Military Criminal Act recently in November 2, 2009. The new regulation punishing the rape and the indecent act by force targeting the military has been established in this revision. The regulation punishing the rape wound, rape murder, etc. has been established as well. The Sodomy has been modified and the statutory punishment has been raised to 2 years. There could be the criticism in connection with this revision as follows; It is not reasonable to lay the regulation of additional punishment in the Military Criminal Act for the simple reason of serviceman whereas there already are the regulations punishing the rape and the indecent act by force in the Criminal Act and there are the regulations punishing the various types of rape and the indecent act by force in the special Criminal Act. Also, the homosexuality between men soldiers is punished by the sodomy which is the lack justification. Therefore, the deletion of the rape and sodomy in the Military Criminal Act is reasonable.

In June 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court made two decisions regarding the issue of whether state courts may assert jurisdiction over foreign corporations of product liability suits. These two decisions are worth reviewing since its Asahi decision in 1987, the Court deeply discussed the court-created jurisdictional theories including the minimum contact standard and the stream-of-commerce theory. The Court in Goodyear Dunlop Tires Operations, S.A. v. Brown denied jurisdiction of the North Carolina courts over three foreign subsidiaries of Goodyear in Luxembourg, Turkey, and France for the accident occurred in France. The Court found that the activities of foreign subsidiaries were single, occasional or unorganized activities, and are not enough to render themselves to the forum's jurisdiction. The Court in J. McIntyre Machinery v. Nicastro also did not approve the jurisdiction of the New Jersey courts over an English manufacturer although the injury caused by its machine occurred in the forum state. The Court strictly interpreted the stream-of-commerce test, by noting that mere placement of the foreign company’s product is not enough to assert jurisdiction over it unless other conducts, such as advertising, direct selling or marketing in the forum, are accompanied. Taking the chance to introduce the recent decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court regarding personal jurisdiction, the paper also looks over various jurisdictional theories over personal jurisdiction.

Jhering’s “Culpa in contrahendo oder Schdensersatz bei nichtigen oder nicht zur Perfection gelangten Verträgen"(1861) seriously affected legislation Germany Civil Code(1900). Germany Civil Code included Initial impossibility et cetera in the title of Culpa in contrahendo, but Korean Civil Code included only Initial impossibility in the title of Culpa in contrahendo. So more complicated controversy (than Germany) last in Korea. Complicated controversy was originated from the theory of Culpa in contrahendo. Before the legislation Germany Civil Code(1900), German common law that was based on Actio system of the Roman law applied in Germany. So, numerous cases that are not included Actio are rejected. Jhering developed the theory of Culpa in contrahendo for surpassing the Actio system, but he can’t overcome it because the theory of Culpa in contrahendo applied to individually specified cases.(If Jhering extrated his theory from Thomasius’s proposition of ‘Non turbabis alios, nec impedies in usu iuris sui’, so his theory had the concept of 「general」 negligence, Complicated controversy maybe didn’t arise.) Anyway, Rivision of the Law of Obligations of German Civil Code(2002) revised widely Articles that were controverted subjects – especially, normal Duty of Providing Information -. So, controversy in Germany is ended to some degree. therefore it is necessary for legislators of Korea to refer to Revision of German Civil Code(2002) in connection with rivision of Korea Civil Code § 535(Culpa in contrahendo).

Speed which is unlimited, it couldn't be reasonable that the deviation phenomena of internet utilization space should be free from legal management and governmental interference and legal norm and governmental intervention would well and truly bring cyberspace problems to settlement. Such is the point within limitation of administrative regulation that the pure civil self-regulation without governmental factor couldn't guarantee regulation efficiency. If so, the most effectual means of eliminating illegal or harmful element of internet based services despite particularity of internet and ensuring sound internet environment will be self-regulation governance composed of government, internet business, and private organization with cooperative consent. Now self-regulation must be distinguished from un-regulation which breaks with administrative regulation, because self-regulation of Korea is confronted with the new phase of affairs due to inauguration of KISO(Korean Internet Self-Governance Organization). On account of internet governance, Internet self-regulation is mended into social responsibility leading to conversion of discipline system from the view point of regulatory composition. In this viewpoint, this article inquires jurisprudential review of the status quo debate on internet self-regulation with regulatory patterns which contain contents regulation but almost exclude structural regulation.

In the past Korean court cases on determining acts of causing confusion of business entities in acts of unfair competition, there are two interpretation theories, which one is only focusing on likelihood of confusion and the other is distinguishing between ‘use’ and ‘likelihood of confusion’. But in a recent Supreme Court Decision 2009do12238(Internet-Channel 21 case) it was determined that pop-up advertisement inserting or substituting advertisement images in the web-pages fell under acts of causing confusion of business entities only based on focusing on likelihood of confusion. According to Article 2, Section 1(Na) of the Korean Unfair Competition Prevention and Trade Secret Protection Act, the term “acts of causing confusion of business entities” as “acts of unfair competition” means “acts of causing confusion with another person's commercial facilities oractivities by using signs identical or similar to another person's name, tradename, emblem or any other sign widely known in the Republic of Korea as anindication of commerce”. Therefore, “using signs” and “causing confusion” is provided separately by the above provision. And in United States, a recent ‘trademark use theory’ is explaining independence of ‘use’ apart from ‘likelihood of confusion’. In conclusion, Supreme Court Decision 2009do12238(Internet-Channel 21 case) shows some problems based upon the provision on acts of causing confusion of business entities and recent ‘trademark use theory’. Therefore, this paper critically analyses and examines some problems from the subject case.

United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods(hereafter referred to as 'Agreement' or 'CISG') specifies that the immunity should be admitted within the range of CISG Article 79 and all sorts of reliefs in the Agreement in case the seller and the buyer breach the duty taken over following the contract in the relationship between the system of the Law of Benefit Obstacles and the Immunity Regulations. CISG Article 79 on immunity prescribes the requisite of immunity in Clause 1, the responsibility of independent third person in Clause 2, the duration of immunity in Clause 3, the notice duty of debtor in Clause 4 and the effect of immunity in Clause 5. According to CISG Article 79 Clause 1, it prescribes that the responsibility for non-fulfillment should not be born in case of proving that the non-fulfillment should be caused by the impediment out of control, the impediment should exist at the time of contracting, the impediment and evasion or overcoming of consequence should not be expected reasonably. The precedent has a dominant position on that the cancellation of contract on grounds of change of circumstances should not be admitted in the temporary contractual relationship like sales agreements, but not in the previous continual contractual relationship in Korea. In these circumstance, it is noteworthy that the judgement of the Supreme Court sentence No.2004DA31302 on 29th March 2007 specified for the first time that the cancellation of contract on grounds of change of circumstances can be admitted in the temporary contractual relationship like sales agreements. In addition, the debate on the legal principle of impediment, CISG Article 79 Clause 1, should be more necessary, especially it is required to concretize the principle in the relationship with the requisite of immunity considering that the introduction of rules of change of circumstances is in the process of debating in the Civil Law of Japan in recent years.

The Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration may designate more valuable cultural heritage than other similar assets as treasures(or national treasures) following deliberation by the Cultural Heritage Committee. And The Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration may designate more valuable intangible cultural heritage than other similar assets as important intangible cultural heritage, following deliberation by the Cultural Heritage Committee. The Administrator of the Cultural Heritage Administration may designate more valuable folklore resources than other similar resources as important folklore resources, following deliberation by the Cultural Heritage Committee. Disposition means the exercise of or refusal to exercise public power by an admnistrative agency as funtion of law enforcement in reration to a specific fact, other similar administrative action.