Earticle

The term ‘communications consumer’ is more commonly used than ‘communications user’ in the U.K. Under the Communications Act of 2003, the word ‘consumer’ is referred to “domestic and small business customer” meaning a customer of communications provider who is neither—(a) himself a communications provider; nor (b) a person who is a customer in respect of an undertaking carried on by him for which more than ten individuals work. Ofcom explains that complaint means an expression of dissatisfaction made to a communications provider related to its products or services, or the complaints-handling process itself, where a response or resolution is explicitly or implicitly expected. Under the Act, Ofcom is an independent organization which regulates the UK’s broadcasting, telecommunications and wireless communications sectors. General condition 14.4, made by Ofcom, requires all communications providers to have a complaints handling code of practice. For example, BT(British Telecommunications) has code of practice for residential customers and small businesses including its code on how to make a complaint and its complaints handling procedure. However, if a communications consumer is still not happy after following the BT's procedure and he has received a deadlock letter or it has been eight weeks since his first complaint was made, he can refer his complaint to the Telecommunications Ombudsman, Otelo. As you may already know, Alternative Dispute Resolution is a well established and important mechanism for giving a consumer access to justice where recourse to the court system by the consumer may be impossible or impractical due to cost and resource restraints. Therefore, Otelo hears disputes from most of the fixed telecommunications industry and from two of the four major mobile operators including BT, and it is a good mechanism for dispute resolution in the U.K.

There is important physical difference in Telecommunication industry between Korea and Australia. First one is the size of territory. That of Australia is 77 times bigger than that of South Korea. Moreover, the population of Australia, with over 21 Million, is 2 times smaller than that of Korea. These differences has deep implication in understanding Telecommunication industry in Australia and finding what is their policy for consumer protection. With long history for transforming a monopolistic and government owned system into competitive one, consumer protection policy in Telecommunication has developed unique system. There are two phase of system, external and internal. While ACCC and ACMA are the representatives of external organizations for consumer protection, TIO and CAL are internal organizations. As the industry specific external organization, ACMA has the authority over the registration of Codes and Standards, implementing of Universal Service, and Investigation. ACCC which is the same as the FTC in Korea is in charge of executing the general competition policy and Telecommunication industry specific competition policy, including interconnection and access regime, and anti-competitive conduct, under Trade Practices Act 1974. On top of that, ACCC has the authority over the policy of Pre-selection, Number Portability, Arbitration, and so on under Telecommunication Act 1997. As the practical organization for consumer protection, TIO has dealt with the complaints of Telecommunication consumer. Consumer can complain to TIO within 12 months after cognizing of problem and the service provider has to be given the opportunity to deal with the case before going to TIO. The complaints are dealt with separately according to the degree of the cases which are from 1 to 4. The most important characteristic of TIO system is that TIO can make binding decision by which the service provider accused by the consumer has to pay damages if the amount of complaint is not over AU $10,000. CAL is the organization formed by the industry players, including service providers, vendors, consultants and suppliers, for stipulating the Codes and Standards. The main point in Telecommunication industry comsumer protection in Australia when comparing to that of Korea is that the industry itself is the prime and first entity. So, the external organization such as ACMA and ACCC is acting as the supervisor and approaching consumer protection issue from the view of policy executor.

The Resolution of the customer complaints is a major issue of the legal risk management in the telecommunication service companies since the companies provides various services to the customers. If the complaints of the customer were not dealt with timely, the customer would apply a formal or informal relief to the government agencies or claim a suit against the company. Formal process or litigation would damage the companies' image to the public as well as the reputation and trustworthiness of the service of the companies. This article introduce the U.S. consumer complaints resolving process regarding telecommunication services by the FCC and the state utilities commissions. In the U.S. Consumer and Government Affairs Bureau(CGB) under the FCC has formal and informal process to resolve the consumer complaints. If telecommunication companies refuse to resolve the complaints voluntarily, the complaining customer can use such formal or informal process in FCC. Especially application process of the informal complaints to the CGB is easily available to the customers since it allows to use mail, fax, email, telephone, and even online. Moreover, the informal process is very speedy resolution compared to the formal resolution. The Consumer Policy Division in the CGB prepares regulations to prevent repetitive complaints of the customers by monitering such complaints. In California, California Public Utilities Commission(CPUC) provides informal and formal resolution of the customer complaints regarding telecommunication service. It even provides alternative dispute resolutions. Especially the alternative dispute resolutions under the CPUC is very speedy process. Usually the disputes are resolved by the ADRs within half or two days. Considering the increase of the number of the consumers and complaints in telecommunication service industry, it needs similar process to resolve consumer complaints by the speedy informal process. The example of the U.S. informal and formal process to resolve the consumer complaints implies to telecommunication companies the trend how to manage the legal risk regarding consumer complaints in the future.

Due to the growing demand of legislation in Korea, the number of statutes has been sharply increased. Meanwhile, there are still many unrealistic and low-quality statutes which inconvenience people or burden enterprises because they are not modified timely despite of the rapidly changing society. Currently, several impact evaluation systems are being implemented includeing the regulatory impact evaluation similar to a prospective legislation-evaluation and statutory improvement including legislation innovation similar to a retrospective legislation-evaluation. Legislative Evaluation of Continental Legal System and Regulatory Impact Analysis of Anglo-American Legal System are generally understood as the same. In spite of regulatory impact analysis that has been taken effect since 1997 in our country, legislative evaluation is actively under discussion now. But the concept of legislative evaluation is introduced in variety and the discussion of that have no consideration for current regulatory impact analysis. Above all, the concept of legislative evaluation needs to be established for a systematization. The purpose of this report is to define the concept of legislative evaluation in comparison with Impact Assessment of EU, Legislative Evaluation of Continental Legal System, Regulatory Impact Analysis of Anglo-American Legal System, Regulatory Impact Analysis of our country. Four comprehensive and systematic plans should be proposed for the application of legislation-evaluation. First plan is to build a social consensus regarding legislation-evaluation and reinforce cooperation in legislation- evaluation research. The second plan is to provide methods for assuring reasonable and professional analysis through strengthening scientific and analytic approach and fostering experts related to legislation- -evaluation. The third plan is to organize institutional framework for the application of legislation-evaluation to try applying legislation-evaluation from a national and broad perspective and to decide the main organization like government agency wholly responsible for legislation-evaluation, the type of introduction of system, the object and standard of legislation-evaluation, the direction about mandatory legislation-evaluation and the effect of its result. The fourth plan is to prepare for legal foundation for institutionalization of the application of legislation-evaluation. To stabilize this application of legislation-evaluation, it is necessary to approach step by step preparing elaborately for concrete matters. The first step is to prepare in advance including doing research on legislation- evaluation. The second step is to gather the opinions of people and form public opinion. The third step is to start a pilot legislation evaluation system. The fourth step is to legislate the ground of application of legislation-evaluation. And the fifth step is to fully implement legislation -evaluation system. This paper finally suggests that the issue of accumulated statutes will be solved and an advanced legislation-evaluation system which prevents problematic statutes will be provided, drastically contributing to reduce the number of statutes improve the quality of legislation, if a evaluation model is built and the correctness and scope of analysis is enhanced through applying a authentic legislation-evaluation system to current quasi legislation-evaluation systems.

韓国において、複数労働組合の許容と労働組合の専従者(専任者) の賃金支給に関する規制は、労働三権の存在方式及び構図に関する 基本的な問題として、1987年の「6・29民主化」の宣言以来、持続的 に議論されてきた課題であり、本格的な議論は1996年の「労使関係 改革委員会」から始まったのである。1997年に「労働組合及び労働 関係調整法(労組法)」を制定する際、事業または事業所単位で労働 組合の設立の自由を保障(「労働組合の自由設立主義」)し、附則第5 条において労働組合の設立に関する経過措置を置き、その附則第5条 第1項で同法の施行後、5年間に事業所内の複数労働組合の設立を暫 定的に制限する形で、複数労働組合の併存を禁止した。また、使用 者が労働組合の専従者の賃金支給を禁止する内容を規定し、2002年1 月から施行することにした。しかし、労組法を2回にわたり改正 (2001年3月28日、2006年12月20日)を行い、2010年1月から施行する 予定である。ところで、法の施行日が2010年と迫ってきたが、政労 使の利害関係者らは、これに対し異なる視点から反対している。労 働界を支援する国際社会もまたこれを批判している実情である。最 近は、2009年の「12・4 政労使合意」に基づき、政労使の意見を一 定部分反映し、労働懸案を改善するための過程にある。政府が関連 立法を強力に押し進めている状況である。 　本稿においては、かかる労組法の改正による労使関係の様相が変 化する推移に応じ、これまでの複数労働組合の許容と労働組合の専 従者の賃金支給に関する勞使關係改革委員會, 政勞使委員會, 勞働 省, 国會などにおいては議論の経過をまとめてみる(Ⅱ)。また、関連 の主な議論課題と対案を考察した後(Ⅲ)、結論では、本稿の内容を 要約・整理 しながら、今後健全な労使関係を達成するための基本的 な枠組みを提示したい(Ⅳ)。 　結論として、韓国の労使関係において継続的な不合理な専従者へ の賃金支給慣行が改善され、正しい労使関係の法と秩序を確立する ために、労働組合設立の自由を保障し、労働組合間の健全な競争関 係を整え、労働組合のサービス機能を強化する等、組合員を中心と した労働組合の活動がますます要求される。このような議論の結果 が、企業経営の透明性と効率性を一層高めるものと見込まれる。

The Act on the protection, etc. of fixed-term and part-time employees was enacted on July 1, 2007. The purpose of this Act is to promote a sound development of the labor market by redressing undue discrimination against fixed-term and part-time employees and strengthening the protection of their working conditions. An employer may hire a fixed-term employee for a period not exceeding two years (In the case of repeated fixed-term labor contracts, the sum of the periods of such contracts shall not exceed two years.). However, If there are a rational reasons, an employer may hire a fixed-term employee for a period in excess of two years. Notwithstanding the fact that those grounds enumerated in the proviso of Article 4 paragraph (1) do not exist or cease to exist, if an employer hires a fixed-term employee for more than two years, the fixed-term employee shall be considered as a worker who has made a labor contract with no fixed term. An employer shall not give discriminatory treatment against fixed-term employees on the ground of their employment status compared with other workers engaged in the same or similar jobs under a labor contract without a fixed term in the business or workplace concerned. In spite of this Act, there are many fixed-term workers have to live with job instability. This study suggest on the Improvement of the Act on the protection, etc. of fixed-term and part-time employees.

Hier behandelnder Fall von Rechtsprechung ist sehr seltener Fall, der die Verursachung einer unrichtiger Vollstreckung der Beamten durch Täuschung oder Entstellung I. S. des § 137 StGBs angewandt wird. Die anhaltende Meinung von Rechtsprechung war es, daß z. B. beim Genehmigungsantrag ist die Verursachung einer unrichtiger Vollstreckung der Beamten durch Täuschung oder Entstellung nicht auf die Täuschung von Antragsteller, sondern auf die unvollständige Prüfung von Beamter beruhe. Danach scheide § 137 StGB aus. Aber sei es nicht der Fall, wenn es dem Beamter die Möglichkeit zum Genehmigungsprüfung nicht vorhanden sei. Die grammatische Auslegung des § 137 StGB erlaubt uferlose Anwen- dungstragweite. Alle Lüge gegen einem Beamten oder alle Ausnutzungs- handlung von irrige oder ahnungslose Situation des Beamten könnten unter diesem § 137 StGB subsumiert werden. Die Rechtsprechung könnte § 137 StGB nicht so weit anwerden. Deshalb hat die Rechtsprechung § 137 StGB mit verschiedener Begrundung nicht angewandt. Aber waren die Begrun- dungen nicht gerecht oder sich gegeneinander in Widerspruch gestanden. Es braucht noch besseren Weg, um die Anwendungstragweite des § 137 StGBs gerecht und vernünftie zu begrenzen. Dieser Vorsatz zeigt sich einen besten Weg: Wenn man § 137 StGB subsidiare Regelung auslege, könnte die Anwendungstragweite des § 137 StGBs best erfolgreich begrenzen. Dafür aber braucht es, die Strafe des § 137 StGBs beträchtlich herabzusetzen. Das geltende Gesetz hat zu hohe Strafe im § 137 StGB. Letztlich aber wenn man § 137 StGB subsidiare Regelung auslegt, scheidet fast beim allen Fälle die Anwendung des § 137 StGBs aus. Dann wäre § 137 StGB unbrauchbar. Die Vorschrift des 137 StGBs ist ein unbrauchbare Regelung.