Earticle

According to the National Statistics Office, Korea already entered aging society, in which the elderly exceeds 7% of the whole popula tion, in the 2000s. It is estimated that it will enter aged society in 2016, where the number is 14% and super aged society in 2026, wh ere the number is 20%. Looking at the Aging Index, which is a co mposite demographic ratio, defined as the percentage between the ol d age population (over 65) and the young population (under 15), Ko rea has doubled from 32.3% in 1999 to 63.5% in 2009. In 2016, the i ndex is expected to be 100.7%, which means that the elderly popula tion exceeds the youth. Korea's aging pace is unprecedented in the world. The increase o f elderly population has the effect of creating new jobs as it opens the era of the silver industry, but it also generates social problems as more elderly are not properly cared. This means that the age of longevity is not a bless and that the government should examine th e elderly welfare from a future oriented and systemic view. Regarding elderly welfare, the Constitution stipulates social welfar e as a social basic right. Based on this, the state legislates and ma nages related laws. Nevertheless, the current elderly welfare system is not effective in substance in pursuing the overall welfare. Theref ore, the establishment of a legal system that secures medical syste m, facilitates employment and enlarges welfare infrastructure for the elderly is in need.

우리나라에서는 2007년 6월 1일 ‘국민의 형사재판 참여에 관한 법 률’이 제정됨에 따라 2008년 1월 1일부터 형사절차에 있어서 국민참여 재판이 시행되어 왔다. 이것은 당시의 사회적 분위기에 따라 사법개혁 의 일환으로써 사법의 민주화를 통해 사법절차에의 시민참여의 개입 과 확대를 도모하기 위해 도입된 제도이었지만 동법 시행 후 5년 동 안의 결과를 바탕으로 헌법 개정을 포함하여 전면적인 검토를 할 것 을 약속하였고, 이에 따라 대법원에서는 2012년 7월 12일 국민사법참 여위원회를 구성하여 최종안을 마련하였다. 국민사법참여위원회에서는 지난 5년 동안 국민참여재판제도가 전반적으로 잘 운영되어 왔으며 형사재판제도의 발전에 상당한 기여를 해왔다는 것을 전제로 하여 더 욱 발전시켜야 한다는 점에 대하여 의견을 같이하고 기존의 제도를 대부분 그대로 유지하되, ‘배심원평결의 효력’과 ‘실시요건’ 등 일부 쟁 점이 있는 부분만 수정을 하였다. 하지만 지난 5년 동안의 시행결과를 보면 애초 예상한 것만큼 국민 참여재판이 활성화되지 못하였으며, 일부 사건에만 사회적 관심이 집 중되었을 뿐 그다지 큰 성과를 거두었다고 평가하기는 어려운 것도 사실이다. 따라서 국민참여재판제도의 도입취지와 그동안의 운영상의 미비점이나 지적되어 온 문제점을 고려할 때 전면적인 개선이 필요한 점을 간과한 것으로 보인다. 특히 국민참여재판의 개시와 관련해서는 법원의 직권 또는 검사의 신청을 인정한 것을 제외하고는 그동안 학 계에서 논의되어 온 그 대상사건이나 개시절차 등에 대해서는 언급하 고 있지 않다. 이에 본고에서는 국민참여재판제도를 도입하고 있는 외국의 입법례 에 있어서 그 역사적 발달과정과 대상사건 및 개시절차를 중심으로 하여 검토해 봄으로써 향후 국민참여재판제도의 구체적인 개정안을 마련하는데 있어서 어떠한 모델을 채택하는 것이 합리적인가에 대한 기초자료를 제공해 보고자 한다. 본고에 서는 배심제를 채택하고 있는 미국, 영국, 프랑스, 러시아 및 스페인과 참심제를 채택하고 있는 독일 과 일본을 대상으로 하여 고찰하고, 배심제나 참심제의 전통을 갖지 못한 우리나라의 사법현실을 고려하여 사법에 대한 시민참여라고 하 는 요소 외에, 실용주의 관점에서 사법절차의 합리성과 효율성의 극대 화 도모라고 하는 차원에서 접근하여 배심제 보다는 참심제의 도입을 주장하고자 한다.

Civic Participation in Criminal Trials Act, the law related to citize n participation in criminal trial, were first conducted in Jan. 1st 200 8 in our country. This Act regarded as a drastic change of the kor ean judiciary system. Our citizens’ participation system is a mixed f orm of the pure jury system in common law countries of Anglo-A merican legal system and lay judge system of the continental count ries, Germany and Japan etc. The introduction of this system was based on the principle of democracy that calls for people's active e ngagement in decision-making processes in the legislature, the admi nistration and the judiciary. Specially, this system was designed to promote citizens' participation in trials as part of ongoing legal refo rms. Therefore the introduce of this system aimed to reinforce the democratic legitimacy of the judicial process and to enhance the tra nsparency and credibility of the judiciary. But, at that time, the Supreme Court promised they will make thi s system into the suitable form for Korean situation after 5 years’ test periods. So, the Supreme Court worked out the revised plan Civic Participation in Criminal Trials Act after several deliberations of Citizens' Judical Participation Committee. But this system come fac e to face the crisis because of low rates of application, high rates o f withdrawal and high rates of exclusion. So. in this paper, I will exercise about the foreign law and syste m about the citizen participation criminal trials – focusing subject crime and opening process. And I will suggest to adopt the layman judge system in the future revision of citizen participation criminal trials taking into account our judical system and our country’s mood about law.

은행에서 통장을 개설할 때, 은행과 고객 사이의 예금에 대한 계약 관계가 발생하며, 기본적으로 대출계약이나 신탁관계가 이에 속한다. 은행과 고객의 관계와 회사와 주주의 관계는 같다. 비록 신탁관계가 같다 할지라도, 그 통제하는 강도는 다르다. 은행은 경영의 전문성을 갖고 있고, 고도의 위험성과 공공의 이익을 보호하는 중요성도 갖고 있다. 이러한 이유로, 은행의 이사는 은행 및 주주, 예금자 그리고 정 부 관리 부문의 공공 이익을 대표하는 등으로 인하여 이해 관계자에 대하여 책임을 부담한다. 선국의 경우, 은행의 이사도 일반 회사의 이 사와 같이 사법(私法)상의 신인의무를 부담한다. 현재 중국의 은행 이사에 대한 책임의 입법은 은행의 특수한 기업 지배의 요구에 적합하지 않으며, 은행 이사의 책임에 대한 법률의 공 백도 많다. 이에 대해서, 《상업은행법》에서는 이해 상관자의 공동 지배 모델을 확립하였고, 구체적으로 이사의 주의의무와 신인의무를 규정하고 있다. 예금자 등의 이해 관계자에까지 신인의무의 대상을 확대하고, 은행이사에 대한 소송 권리를 부여하고 있다. 이는 은행의 이사가 감독을 위반하여 회사에 손실을 주었을 경우를 규정한 것이 다. 본 연구에서는 이사의 의무에 대한 각도에서, 먼저 은행과 고객의 범위를 살펴보고, 다음으로 은행과 고객 관계의 성질과 특성을 살펴 본 후, 은행의 이사가 부담하는 주의의무에 대해 논한다. 현재 중국의 경제 발전은 급속히 진전되고 있으며, 이에 따른 경제 전반의 글로벌 스탠다드 적용에 대한 논의가 많은 가운데, 금융회사 이사가 부담하 는 의무는 일반회사의 이사가 부담하는 것 보다 더 강한 주의의무를 부담하여야 할 것이며, 이는 세계적 흐름 속에서 당연한 것이라 할 것이다.

When a customer opens a bank account, a contractual relationship between the Bank and customer is created in terms of the deposit money and, generally, a loan agreement and trust relations belong t o such relationship. The relationship between the Bank and its cust omer is the same to that between a company and its shareholder. However, even though the trust relationship in those two cases is t he same, the level of control is different. The Bank has specialty in business management and function in preventing high risk and prot ecting the public interest. For this reason, the Bank's director is re sponsible for the interest of persons concerned because he or she re presents the Bank, shareholders, depositor and government- manage d public interests. In case of developed countries, the directors of th e Bank have fiduciary duty under private law. Present legislation of China regarding the responsibility of the dir ectors of Banks does not meet the demands of special corporate go vernance of the Bank and there also exist a legal vacuum. Correspo nding to this, <Commercial Bank Act> sets forth a model of joint control of persons concerned and specifically prescribes the directors ' duty of care and fiduciary duty. The scope of persons to which t he directors have fiduciary duty expands to include the interested p arties of depositor so that such parties have the right to file a suit against the directors. This is for the instances where the director o f a Bank violates his or her supervisory duties which causes a loss to a company. In this paper, in the respect of directors' duties, I examine the s cope of the Bank and customers first and then explore the nature a nd characteristics of the relationship between the Bank and its cust omers. Lastly, I deal with the fiduciary duty of the directors of Ban k. In particular, I examine whether, like those in Korea, the Bank's directors in China has heavier fiduciary duties compared to those of general companies or not and then I discuss the things to be impro ved with regard of that fiduciary duty.

基于银行帐户的建立，即成立存款合同而发端的银行与客户 的关系，其基本属性应该界定为借贷契约而信托关系。银行与客户的关系 和公司于股东的关系一样。虽然信托关系一样，但是控制强度不一样。因 为银行拥有经营的专业性、高风险性和保护供利益的重要性。由于这样的 理由，银行董事应对银行及其股东、存款人，以及代表公共利益的政府金 融管理部门等银行利益相关者承担责任。银行董事也承担和一般公司董事 相同的私法上的信义义务。 中国目前银行董事责任的立法并不适应银行的公司治理特殊性的要求， 对银行董事的责任的衔接缺乏规定。对此，应在《商业银行法》中确立利 益相关者共同治理模式，具体规定董事的管制义务和信义义务；将信义义 务的对象扩大到存款人等利益相关者，赋予存款保险公司代表存款人对银 行董事提起诉讼的权利；规定私人对银行董事违反银行监管部门规章所造成的损失可提起诉讼，使银行董事的 管制责任具有可诉性。

It is regulated for divided owner to divide part of exclusively ow ned part he has from right to use land area, and it is prohibited to separate two parties. Change of legal relationship of right to use a site that this unity of selling is applied is not registered in land reg ister, but in building register, after that both parties follow the sam e legal destiny, unite the right relation, this kind of right to use lan d area is called right to a site. Hence, right to a site is not actual concept of a law, but it can be considered as a concept of adjective law of the real property registration act. The real property registration act is, if it is a collective building, actually combine a building register and a land register, in principal, not making an official note of change of legal relationship about rig ht to use land area on a land register, instead, it is requested to m ake an official note these on building register with change of legal relation about building. In other words, retain conventional land regi ster and building register, but for a register of collective building, i nstead of leave it in each sectioned building, use 1 paper for 1 unit of collective building, let it does indication registration of the unit 1 whole building and indication registration about a lot number of the land which is a goal of a right of a site and area on a column for a title, meanwhile, after joint column for a title, requested to registe r that, make additional column for a title and ext A and exit B to mark each sectioned building and legal relationship data. And, let it only register the part of exclusive ownership on column for a title of each sectioned building, request to register type of a right to a s ite and ratio of portion among column for a title, later by prohibitin g ownership transfer registration on a right to a site and mortgage registration, try the practical integration of land register and buildin g register. And, on the first registration of initial ownership of real estate, if a right to a site is unregistered, by letting registration officer to us e the actual evaluation right to closely investigate a reason for a ri ght to a site is unregistered, write a reason of unregistered right of a site title, the method to analyze legal relation easier for the gener al public, who have undefined fear of unregistered right to a site, s hould be legalized.

Divided ownership refers to a form of ownership in which a land is divided into multiple things and shared by many individuals, but in truth it is sharing land with others by divided it by individual p urpose and use it only for themselves. In past, the size of individual lands was bigger and it was hard to get permission from a government office. Also as the difficulty of technology in dividing land by individual purposes, usually they use the land in divided ownershi p form. However in present, as the opposite of past, it makes a change that individual owners combine multiple lands into one land and build a building which own by several individuals. As in this cas e, the occurrence of divided ownership can not be controlled so the special regulations about divided ownership must be established. Like in these days, especially when the town-houses which combine the conveniences of detached house and the advantages of apartment have built in many places, the sharing in divided ownership form has been occupied and abused frequently. For example. the garden only for uses of first floor residents or other support rooms for uses of certain person have laid many problems and these are the realities of life. Even though there is a regulation states that the garden can not be used by certain person(clause 10, Multi-owned Building Act), by using the blind shaft of before the establishment of co nservancy, sale manufacturers made arbitrary contract that they allow to use certain part of building as the divided ownership sharing which is unlawful act so it needs to be cautious meanwhile it needs legal examination about these acts. In point that the divided owner relationship composite by interact people trust, people need to separate and look into the 2 sides, the interior side between trusters and consignees as like as in people trust in a principle of law and the exterior side of the 3rd people. Also this these will look into if the divided ownership can be preserved, when the land transfer to the 3rd person.

The public institution from the state or local governments is available for our convenience, meanwhile damages are often occured. Ensuring the rights of the damage compensation is the basic principle of the constitutional state. The most complete form of the constitutional state is established by carrying through the system of protection of the rights and double-edged sword of the law should be judged. When we violate the law, we will be punished and when government agencies violate the rights and interests of individuals, the compensation is needed of course. Claim for damages is increasing as frequently occurring accident caused by defects of the various public institution. 1 of Article 29 of the Constitution regulates National liability due to illegal acts of officials, also in Article 2 , Article 5 of the State Compensation. Article 758 of the Civil Code stipulates the liability of the occupier or owner of the workpiece. On the perspective which damage compensation must be gurateed unless personal reasons attributable, this paper is a study of Article 5 of the State Compensation, the liability of the state or local government due to defects in the public institution. This paper also researches legal concepts and criteria of the public institution, installation management, reparations, claims procedure, the type of road and transportation facilities of public institution in Seoul, judicial precedent of Korea and Japan and presents some efficient improvements.

This paper is the study on the trends of precedents about the functionality of trade dress. 3 recent CAFC's precedents were introduced. First, Functionality doctrine does not imply that preserving basic elements for the public domain is the doctrine's only role. Another goal, as TrafFix stressed, is to separate the spheres of patent and trademark law, and to ensure that the term of a patent is not extended beyond the period authorized by the legislature. CAFC held that a design such as Clarin's x-frame chair was functional not because it was the only way to do things, but because it represented one of many solutions to a problem. Second, in contrast to Franek’s mark, the green-gold pads in Qualitex were so distinctive that they were nonfunctional. But a circle was the kind of basic design that a producer like Jay Franco adopted because lternatives were scarce and some consumers wanted the shape regardless of who anufactured it. A design's aesthetic appeal could be as functional as its tangible characteristics. CAFC held that trademark for circular beach towel was functional, and therefore, not protectable. Third, AFC decided 5 factors to determine whether a design was functional: (1) the existence of a utility patent, expired or unexpired, that involves or describes the functionality of an item's design element; (2) the utilitarian properties of the item's unpatented design elements; (3) advertising of the item that touts the utilitarian advantages of the item's design elements; (4) the dearth of, or difficulty in creating, alternative designs for the item's purpose; (5) the effect of the design feature on an item's quality or cost.

Greenbelt regulations have started in 1971 when green space was installed for the purpose of reasonable city management and proper regulation of city expansion. There have been numerous debates over the effects of the regulation. However, in general, greenbelt is as sessed to have made a big contribution to curbing random expansion of the city area and to constraining real estate speculation and furthermore, to providing green space to the city residents. However, as a result of excessive restraint over land use, small and middle sized cities near the greenbelt area have suffered much difficulties regardless of their will. Especially residents within the greenbelt area have been forced to sacrifice their rights to exercise private property rights. The advent of democracy and lozalization along with the enhanced awareness of people regarding their rights have called for a reasonable measure to address the problems of the rigid greenbelt regulation. As a result, the regulation went through athorough revamp in 1999. The Constitutional Court ruled that the absence of compensation clauses on land does not comply with the Constitution which states the guarantee of people's right to property. It called for a legislation which introduces a reasonable greenbelt area fit for the 21th century. Since then, greenbelt regulation has been headed toward easing the restraints on land property right. Violation of personal property rights resulting from random designation of greenbelt area should be addressed properly. Therefore, countermeasures which do not make a dent in the effects and original intention of the greenbelt area and at the same time guarantee the individual property rights should be taken.