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.
논문 기본 정보
- 자료유형
- 학술저널
- 저자정보
- 발행연도
- 2011.12
- 수록면
- 277 - 325 (49page)
- DOI
- 10.35505/sjlb.2011.12.1.3.277
이용수
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
There has been huge controversy about the Korea-U.S. Free Trade Agreement (“Kor-US FTA”), among which the Investor-State-Dispute (“ISD”) clause has been the most controversial issue, especially between the rulling and opposing parties.
This ISD system provides an investor to challenge the host country’s laws, regulations or public policies by filing an international arbitration for loss of expected profit against the host country. It is a very useful tool to protect the investor. However, as its protection level is too high, it causes criticism that it pillages a nation’s wealth and subordinates the nation. Moreover, from a critical viewpoint that it is often used as a tool for the developed countries such as U.S.A. and EU nations to obstruct the under-developed countries’ economic growth and destroys their economic bases, it cannot help being criticised as a powerful weapon for making a new type of economic colony.
The Kor-US FTA pertains the ISD clause to cover the expansive industrial fields along with a presumption clause of prior consent on the ISD arbitration, which facilitates an U.S. investor to easily file an arbitration against our country whenever it claims any loss of its expected payoff. As a result of it, our government cannot carryout any public policies, and even further, should compensate the investor with our tax money. Furthermore, it causes supra-constitutional or unconstitutional results by infringing our sovereign powers of legislation, administration and jurisdiction.
Accordingly, this thesis will explain the ISD itself including its history, and suggest its possible problems and harmful consequences by showing the real cases.
This ISD system provides an investor to challenge the host country’s laws, regulations or public policies by filing an international arbitration for loss of expected profit against the host country. It is a very useful tool to protect the investor. However, as its protection level is too high, it causes criticism that it pillages a nation’s wealth and subordinates the nation. Moreover, from a critical viewpoint that it is often used as a tool for the developed countries such as U.S.A. and EU nations to obstruct the under-developed countries’ economic growth and destroys their economic bases, it cannot help being criticised as a powerful weapon for making a new type of economic colony.
The Kor-US FTA pertains the ISD clause to cover the expansive industrial fields along with a presumption clause of prior consent on the ISD arbitration, which facilitates an U.S. investor to easily file an arbitration against our country whenever it claims any loss of its expected payoff. As a result of it, our government cannot carryout any public policies, and even further, should compensate the investor with our tax money. Furthermore, it causes supra-constitutional or unconstitutional results by infringing our sovereign powers of legislation, administration and jurisdiction.
Accordingly, this thesis will explain the ISD itself including its history, and suggest its possible problems and harmful consequences by showing the real cases.
목차
Ⅰ. 투자자-국가 중재제도(ISD) 개관
Ⅱ. ICSID중재 관할권의 요건
Ⅲ. 한미FTA가 상정하고 있는 ISD제도의 문제점
Ⅳ. ISD제도의 폐해를 보여주는 실제 사례
Ⅴ. 결론
참고문헌
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청이 논문과 연관된 판례 (1)
-
대법원 1993. 2. 9. 선고 92도2685 판결
가. 거위털 이불이 수입선다변화품목으로 분류되자 일본 법인이 생산한 거위털 이불을 대만으로 보내 일본제 상표를 제거하고 그 자리에 대만제 상표를 부착하여 대만제 거위털 이불로 위장한 다음 마치 대만제 거위털 이불을 수입하는 것으로 가장하여 수입승인을 받고 이에 기하여 수입면허를 받으려고 한 행위는 사위의 방법으로 수입면허를 받으려고 한 경우
자세히 보기
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2013-360-001765515