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
This dispute relates to the Inchon International Airport (IIA) project, which is being constructed in the Republic of Korea. At issue is whether the entities that have had procurement responsibility for the project since its inception are "covered entitles" under the Agreement on Government Procurement. The United States also raised the issue of whether the procurement practices of these entitles are or have been inconsistent with Korea's obligations under the Agreement on Government Procurement and whether they nullify or impair benefits accruing to the United States under that Agreement.
The United States requested the Panel to make the following findings that MOCT (including the New Airport Development Group under MOCT), KAA, KOACA, and IIAC, all of which are or have been in the past Korean Government entities involved in procurement for the Inchon International Airport project, are covered under Korea's Appendix I of the GPA. And the United States also requested the Panel to make the following finding that should the Panel determine that the above measures do not violate the GPA, the measures nevertheless nullify or impair benefits accruing to the United States under the GPA, pursuant to Article XXII:2 of the GPA.
On the other hand, Korea requested the Panel to reject the complaints to the United States on the basis of the following finding that the entities conducting procurement for the Inchon International Airport are not covered entitles under Korea's Appendix I of the GPA. Panel concluded that KAA does not fall within the terms of Articles 2(3), 3(1) or 4 of the Government Organization Act, therefore prima facie KAA does not fall within the terms of Note 1 to Annex 1 of Korea's Schedule, and KAA was established by law as an independent juristic entity; it authored and adopted its own by-laws, In a word, panel concluded that the IIA construction project was not covered as the entities engaged in procurement for the project are not covered entities within the meaning of Article I of the GPA.
Also the United States requested measures it claimed violated the GPA nullify or impair benefits accruing to the United States under the GPA, pursuant to Article XXII:2 of the GPA.
Panel said that Korea's answer to the US question in July 1991 was insufficient. However, Members must protect their own interests as well and in this case the United States did not do so. Therefore, panel found that, even If the principles of a traditional non-violation case were applicable In this situation the United States has failed to carry its burden of proof to establish that it had reasonable expectations that a benefit had accrued. In short, Panel concluded US has not demonstrated error successfully as a basis for a claim of non-Violation nullification or impairment of benefits.
The United States requested the Panel to make the following findings that MOCT (including the New Airport Development Group under MOCT), KAA, KOACA, and IIAC, all of which are or have been in the past Korean Government entities involved in procurement for the Inchon International Airport project, are covered under Korea's Appendix I of the GPA. And the United States also requested the Panel to make the following finding that should the Panel determine that the above measures do not violate the GPA, the measures nevertheless nullify or impair benefits accruing to the United States under the GPA, pursuant to Article XXII:2 of the GPA.
On the other hand, Korea requested the Panel to reject the complaints to the United States on the basis of the following finding that the entities conducting procurement for the Inchon International Airport are not covered entitles under Korea's Appendix I of the GPA. Panel concluded that KAA does not fall within the terms of Articles 2(3), 3(1) or 4 of the Government Organization Act, therefore prima facie KAA does not fall within the terms of Note 1 to Annex 1 of Korea's Schedule, and KAA was established by law as an independent juristic entity; it authored and adopted its own by-laws, In a word, panel concluded that the IIA construction project was not covered as the entities engaged in procurement for the project are not covered entities within the meaning of Article I of the GPA.
Also the United States requested measures it claimed violated the GPA nullify or impair benefits accruing to the United States under the GPA, pursuant to Article XXII:2 of the GPA.
Panel said that Korea's answer to the US question in July 1991 was insufficient. However, Members must protect their own interests as well and in this case the United States did not do so. Therefore, panel found that, even If the principles of a traditional non-violation case were applicable In this situation the United States has failed to carry its burden of proof to establish that it had reasonable expectations that a benefit had accrued. In short, Panel concluded US has not demonstrated error successfully as a basis for a claim of non-Violation nullification or impairment of benefits.
목차
Ⅰ. 사실관계
Ⅱ. 사건의 진행
Ⅲ. 당사국의 주장
Ⅳ. 패널의 결정
Ⅴ. 패널 결정의 근거
Ⅵ. 결론을 갈음하며 - GAP의 현황과 전망
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!
-
개정 WTO 정부조달협정(GPA)의 내용 분석과 평가
통상법률
2011 .10
-
WTO 정부조달협정 발전방안 연구 : 투명성과 재정효율성의 조화 문제를 중심으로
통상법률
2009 .06
-
WTO 정부조달제도(GPA)로부터 바라본 중국 정부조달제도의 문제점과 입법과제
경영법률
2013 .01
-
개정 WTO 정부조달협정과 지방계약법의 발전방안
지방자치법연구
2014 .01
-
GPA 개정에 따른 FTA 정부조달규정의 개정 문제
국제경제법연구
2014 .03
-
정부조달분야의 국제 거버넌스 협정에 관한 연구
관세학회지
2009 .12
-
한·미 FTA 하에서 미 연방 정부조달 법규와 조달절차에 관한 연구 : 연방조달청 MAS 프로그램을 중심으로
통상법률
2009 .08
-
국제무역환경 변화에 따른 정부조달무역정책의 거버넌스 연구
통상정보연구
2006 .03
-
향후 한국 FTA 정부조달분야 협상의 쟁점 검토 : 호주/뉴질랜드, GCC와의 FTA 사례를 중심으로
국제경제법연구
2009 .11
-
개정 정부조달협정(GPA)의 주요 내용과 정책 시사점
[KIEP] 오늘의 세계경제
2016 .01
-
재정행정법과 국제경제법의 상관관계에서 본 정부조달계약
행정법연구
2007 .05
-
WTO GPA와 民營化 基準 考察
통상법률
2003 .10
-
분권화시대의 지방정부 조달시스템 효율화 방안
경기연구원 기본연구
2011 .12
-
TPP 정부조달분야 : GPA와의 차이 및 향후 한국의 정부조달 시장개방 협상에 대한 함의
무역학회지
2017 .08
-
한·중 FTA 관련 중국 정부조달시장 개방에 관한 중국정부조달법(政府采構法) 연구 및 대응방안 모색
중앙법학
2012 .09
-
중국 정부조달 시장의 개방과 한국에 미치는 영향 분석
중국과 중국학
2008 .08
-
AN EXPLORATORY APPROACH ON PUBLIC E-PROCUREMENT IN CHINA BASED ON KOREAN SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION
한국로고스경영학회 학술발표대회논문집
2007 .07
-
AN EXPLORATORY APPROACH ON PUBLIC E-PROCUREMENT SYSTEM IN CHINA BASED ON KOREAN SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION
한국로고스경영학회 학술발표대회논문집
2007 .07
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-361-002620783