인문학
사회과학
자연과학
공학
의약학
농수해양학
예술체육학
복합학
DBpia AI
AI 에이전트
AI 아이디어
AI 리더
AI 뷰어
Citeasy
크롬 서지관리 다운로드
개인구독
소속 기관이 없으신 경우, 개인 정기구독을 하시면 저렴하게
논문을 무제한 열람 이용할 수 있어요.
지원사업
학술연구/단체지원/교육 등 연구자 활동을 지속하도록 DBpia가 지원하고 있어요.
커뮤니티
연구자들이 자신의 연구와 전문성을 널리 알리고, 새로운 협력의 기회를 만들 수 있는 네트워킹 공간이에요.
학술저널
Full-text
오류 신고하기해당 페이지 내 제목·저자·목차·페이지정보가 잘못된 경우 알려주세요!
초록·키워드
Retrieval of illegally removed cultural artefacts is a common international concern nowadays. Resolution of such issue involving stolen or illegally removed cultural assets includes legal approach and political and/or diplomatic approach. First, for the legal approach, there are two methods; one is to file a civil suit, and the other is through arbitration or mediation. However, there is no international agreement addressing the binding rules of the return of the artefacts, and there is no international organization to supervise such issues. Ultimately, no legal protection exists to effectively handle the retrieval of cultural artefacts. Moreover, disputes over cultural assets mostly involve sharp conflicts between countries, which make it difficult for the parties to arrive at a settlement or mediation. Even in this harsh reality, parties involved lodge civil lawsuits in their courts, to tirelessly fight for the justice of the retrieval of illegally removed cultural assets.
In 2008, the United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, ordered the Russian Federation to return the cultural artefacts to the original owner in the well-known case of Agudas Chasidei of United states v. Russian Federation. Through such precedence, many started to anticipate hopes of legally resolving disputes regarding cultural artefacts. Also, after the verdict of the return of the assets, the court made a sanction decision to charge for compelling the execution. This verdict has significance in that it is legal realization of justice to return the cultural artefacts to the rightful owner. However, this case currently remains unresolved, turned into a diplomatic dispute between nations. Even so, this judgment clearly defines the legal boundary of the theft and illegal transfer of cultural artefacts, and is a compelling verdict especially for Koreans; who experienced such loss, yet failed to comprehend the scale of damage, and traced the path of the loss, yet unable to retrieve the artefacts.
In 2008, the United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit, ordered the Russian Federation to return the cultural artefacts to the original owner in the well-known case of Agudas Chasidei of United states v. Russian Federation. Through such precedence, many started to anticipate hopes of legally resolving disputes regarding cultural artefacts. Also, after the verdict of the return of the assets, the court made a sanction decision to charge for compelling the execution. This verdict has significance in that it is legal realization of justice to return the cultural artefacts to the rightful owner. However, this case currently remains unresolved, turned into a diplomatic dispute between nations. Even so, this judgment clearly defines the legal boundary of the theft and illegal transfer of cultural artefacts, and is a compelling verdict especially for Koreans; who experienced such loss, yet failed to comprehend the scale of damage, and traced the path of the loss, yet unable to retrieve the artefacts.
인공지능 문자 인식 모델을 통해 추출된 텍스트로, 일부 오타나 오류가 포함될 수 있으나 지속적으로 개선 중입니다.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
오류를 발견하셨다면 해당 부분을 드래그한 후 ' 를 통해 신고해주세요.
최근 본 자료 전체보기
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2018-360-001259772
