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.
초록· 키워드
오류제보하기
The Korea-vessel case that on October 21, 2002, the European Communities brought to WTO to consult with Korea about started and then, the panel report was adopted on April 11, 2005.
The key points in Korea-Vessel(EC) case are divided into three part.
The first point is related to export subsidies, that is, whether the Act Establishing the Export-Import Bank of Korea(KEXIM), the Pre￢Shipment Loan(PSL) and Advance Payment Refund Guarantee(APRG) schemes established by KEXIM, themselves, constitute export subsides and whether APRG and PSL assistance provided by KEXIM to each company is in export subsidies. Then, the second point is whether debt restructuring, tax concession and transactions that the creditors participating in the relevant restructurings and workout gave to Deawoo and other vessel companies constitute actionable subsidies. The last key point is related to serious prejudice. That is, whether the subsidy which Korean vessel companies were given has caused serious prejudice to EC.
In the first Issue, the panel do not agree that the Act Establishing the Export-Import Bank of Korea and other related regulations; APRG and PSL program schemes established by KEXIM constitute export subsides, On the other hand, the Panel recalled that prohibited subsidies were provided in respect of certain individual APRGs and PSLs.
In the second issue, the finding of panel was that debt restructuring, tax concession and transactions performed by the creditors, these types of workout did not constitute actionable subsidies.
In the third issue, the panel rejected the EC claim that the fact that APRG and PSL by schemes established by KEXIM were given to each company brought serious prejudice to the EC' s interests.
Therefore, Korea has to withdraw the individual APRG and PSL found export subsidies by the panel within the reasonable time-penod. Construing that the effect of withdraw applies henceforth, Korea has to manage the system to be the almost same condition company could meet in the market as considering commercial decision to the condition of providing export financing.
The key points in Korea-Vessel(EC) case are divided into three part.
The first point is related to export subsidies, that is, whether the Act Establishing the Export-Import Bank of Korea(KEXIM), the Pre￢Shipment Loan(PSL) and Advance Payment Refund Guarantee(APRG) schemes established by KEXIM, themselves, constitute export subsides and whether APRG and PSL assistance provided by KEXIM to each company is in export subsidies. Then, the second point is whether debt restructuring, tax concession and transactions that the creditors participating in the relevant restructurings and workout gave to Deawoo and other vessel companies constitute actionable subsidies. The last key point is related to serious prejudice. That is, whether the subsidy which Korean vessel companies were given has caused serious prejudice to EC.
In the first Issue, the panel do not agree that the Act Establishing the Export-Import Bank of Korea and other related regulations; APRG and PSL program schemes established by KEXIM constitute export subsides, On the other hand, the Panel recalled that prohibited subsidies were provided in respect of certain individual APRGs and PSLs.
In the second issue, the finding of panel was that debt restructuring, tax concession and transactions performed by the creditors, these types of workout did not constitute actionable subsidies.
In the third issue, the panel rejected the EC claim that the fact that APRG and PSL by schemes established by KEXIM were given to each company brought serious prejudice to the EC' s interests.
Therefore, Korea has to withdraw the individual APRG and PSL found export subsidies by the panel within the reasonable time-penod. Construing that the effect of withdraw applies henceforth, Korea has to manage the system to be the almost same condition company could meet in the market as considering commercial decision to the condition of providing export financing.
목차
Ⅰ. 조선 보조금 분쟁의 발생 배경 및 전개과정
Ⅱ. 사건의 주요 법적 쟁점
Ⅲ. 사건의 주요 법적 쟁점
Ⅳ. 주요 쟁점별 판정내용의 분석(실체적 쟁점사항을 중심으로)
參考文獻
Abstract
참고문헌 (0)
참고문헌 신청함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
농산물 수출에서 물류비 보조금의 효과
해운물류연구
2018 .01
-
The effects of export logistics cost subsidies on the exports in the agricultural industry of Korea
한국무역학회 국제학술대회
2017 .11
-
EXPORT SUBSIDY COMPETITION AND THE WTO AGREEMENT
Journal of Economic Development
2003 .01
-
수출보험이 수출공급에 미친 영향에 관한 연구
무역연구
2009 .01
-
Export Subsidy Enhancing Aggregate Productivity
한국무역학회 학술대회
2015 .05
-
Export Subsidy Enhancing Aggregate Productivity
무역학자 전국대회 발표논문집
2015 .05
-
Korea-Commercial Vessels 사건의 재고찰 : 통상분쟁의 전략적 함의를 중심으로
통상법률
2007 .10
-
정부의 수출지원이 중소기업 수출에 미치는 효과
기업경영연구
2010 .01
-
미국의 면화보조금에 대한 WTO 평결
행정법연구
2009 .12
-
수출지원 정책을 통한 중소기업의 수출확대 방안에 관한 연구 : 충남지역을 중심으로
관세학회지
2010 .02
-
WTO 보조금 분쟁을 대비한 수출신용제도 운영방안에 관한 연구
무역상무연구
2013 .02
-
한ㆍ일 수출보험과 수출촉진에 관한 비교연구
통상정보연구
2008 .12
-
WTO 보조금 협정상의 보조금과 농업협정상의 보조금의 상호관계 고찰 : 미국 면화보조금 사건에 대한 분석을 중심으로
국제경제법연구
2006 .12
-
한ㆍEU 조선산업 보조금분쟁에 관한 연구
무역학회지
2003 .09
-
Enhancing Aggregate Productivity Through Export Subsidy
무역연구
2015 .01
-
WTO 農業協定에서의 農産物의 輸出補助에 관한 硏究
통상법률
2005 .06
-
A Rationale for Export Insurance Subsidy
무역연구
2014 .01
-
Welfare Implications of Upstream Subsidy, Countervailing Duties, and Limited Verifiability
한국무역학회 세미나 및 토론회
2018 .04
-
한ㆍ미 수출보험이 수출에 미치는 영향에 관한 비교연구
무역학회지
2002 .12
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-361-002576342