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
In this study, main tasks for the standardization of the related raw of origin will be described like below.
First of all, in case of non preferential items, according to the Foreign-trade-law, Ministry of Knowledge Economy in Korea is the main ministry is currently leading the negotiation with other relevant ministries and making the comprehensive framework. In case of the preferential items, according to the Customs-law, Korea Customs Service is managing the origin of items. However, in case of China, the director legislated the ordinance of the origin of export cargo and the relevant ministries are managing them In case of Japan, Customs service is managing the rule of origin according to the Customs-law. The thing is that the two foreign countries are not comprehensively managing the rule of origin and therefore, they urgently have to build up the framework for the rule of origin like Korea.
Second of all, the main purpose of the rule of origin in Korea is to manage, to prohibit the import and export, to keep the fair trade and to protect the customers. However, China aims to confirm the origin country in order to carry out the rule of origin. Japan aims to manage standard of origin decision for management of preferential origin. Each country has different purpose for the rule of origin. To pursue the common market among three countries, each of us manages the rule of origin, aiming comprehensively to manage non preferential items and preferential items, to keep the fair trade and to protect the customers. Third of all, Korea, Japan and China differently defined items for the management of origin. It's because they have different manageable purposes. We have to unify the purpose and defined items of the rule of origin.
Fourth of all, when we consider the table 3 of standard of origin for judgement, Korea, Japan and China have different criteria. Therefore, we have to set up the same criteria for the actual operation.
Fifth of all, Korea, Japan and China differently manage to indicate the origin. It's mainly because Japan and China are insufficient to keep the fair trade and to protect the customers. To make the common market among three countries is the core goal for Korea, Japan and China FTA. That's why we have to hurry up to establish the standard for the management of the rule of origin.
Sixth of all, the punishment level for the rule is the key indicator to express the achievement of common missions. Comparing with Korea, Japan and China relatively have the weak punishment regulations and have to improve these rules. Beyond what I listed up, there would be a lot of tasks to improve the standardization. However, I summarized the priority tasks.
Korea, Japan and China will have bigger portion in the world wide economy if free trade deal among three countries is contracted. As the necessity of this FTA is important, I hope that this thesis would help. There are a lot of improvement opportunities to strengthen the standardization and I win keep going it.
First of all, in case of non preferential items, according to the Foreign-trade-law, Ministry of Knowledge Economy in Korea is the main ministry is currently leading the negotiation with other relevant ministries and making the comprehensive framework. In case of the preferential items, according to the Customs-law, Korea Customs Service is managing the origin of items. However, in case of China, the director legislated the ordinance of the origin of export cargo and the relevant ministries are managing them In case of Japan, Customs service is managing the rule of origin according to the Customs-law. The thing is that the two foreign countries are not comprehensively managing the rule of origin and therefore, they urgently have to build up the framework for the rule of origin like Korea.
Second of all, the main purpose of the rule of origin in Korea is to manage, to prohibit the import and export, to keep the fair trade and to protect the customers. However, China aims to confirm the origin country in order to carry out the rule of origin. Japan aims to manage standard of origin decision for management of preferential origin. Each country has different purpose for the rule of origin. To pursue the common market among three countries, each of us manages the rule of origin, aiming comprehensively to manage non preferential items and preferential items, to keep the fair trade and to protect the customers. Third of all, Korea, Japan and China differently defined items for the management of origin. It's because they have different manageable purposes. We have to unify the purpose and defined items of the rule of origin.
Fourth of all, when we consider the table 3 of standard of origin for judgement, Korea, Japan and China have different criteria. Therefore, we have to set up the same criteria for the actual operation.
Fifth of all, Korea, Japan and China differently manage to indicate the origin. It's mainly because Japan and China are insufficient to keep the fair trade and to protect the customers. To make the common market among three countries is the core goal for Korea, Japan and China FTA. That's why we have to hurry up to establish the standard for the management of the rule of origin.
Sixth of all, the punishment level for the rule is the key indicator to express the achievement of common missions. Comparing with Korea, Japan and China relatively have the weak punishment regulations and have to improve these rules. Beyond what I listed up, there would be a lot of tasks to improve the standardization. However, I summarized the priority tasks.
Korea, Japan and China will have bigger portion in the world wide economy if free trade deal among three countries is contracted. As the necessity of this FTA is important, I hope that this thesis would help. There are a lot of improvement opportunities to strengthen the standardization and I win keep going it.
목차
Abstract
Ⅰ. 서론
Ⅱ. 원산지 관련법의 주요 내용 비교 분석
Ⅲ. 통일화 방안
Ⅳ. 요약 및 결론
참고문헌
참고문헌 (6)
참고문헌 신청
함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문
논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!
-
상품의 원산지결정에 대한 연구 : 교토협약 및 WTO 원산지규정을 중심으로
한국관세학회 학술대회
2007 .11
-
상품의 원산지결정에 대한 연구 : 교토협약 및 WTO 원산지규정을 중심으로
관세학회지
2007 .12
-
특혜원산지규정에 대한 국제통상규범의 적용 범위
한양법학
2018 .08
-
원산지의 제반이론과 규정 분석 그리고 원산지 판정에 관한 연구
통상정보연구
2007 .06
-
원산지증명제도의 효율성에 관한 실증적 연구
관세학회지
2010 .02
-
특혜원산지규정 분석을 통한 FTA 특혜관세 적용방안에 관한 연구
관세학회지
2010 .02
-
Country of Origin, and ?
한국경영학회 융합학술대회
2015 .08
-
중국·인도의 원산지규정과 대응 방안
무역연구
2012 .01
-
한ㆍ중 FTA의 원산지 결정기준에 관한 연구
무역학회지
2008 .06
-
우리나라의 FTA 추진에 따른 원산지 결정기준에 관한 연구 : 한국, 중국, 일본을 중심으로
관세학회지
2008 .02
-
디지털 무역상 원산지에 관한 연구
법학논집
2020 .01
-
Rules of Origin and Protection
한국무역학회 학술대회
2009 .04
-
한ㆍ아세안 FTA의 원산지결정기준과 원산지증명서 작성에 관한 연구
통상정보연구
2007 .06
-
미국법상의 원산지판정 기준과 개성공단 생산제품의 원산지판정 문제
법학논집
2004 .01
-
한국소비자의 수입원산지 제품의 국가별 반응도에 관한 연구
통상정보연구
2010 .03
-
FTA 원산지규정 위반 판정사례와 시사점
무역상무연구
2011 .02
-
WTO 특혜원산지규정의 문제점
해사법연구
2006 .01
-
일본의 EPA 추진과 원산지 규정에 관한 연구
무역연구
2010 .01
-
대외무역법 원산지표시제도 쟁점사항 개선방안
무역상무연구
2013 .02
이 논문의 저자 정보
이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문
최근 본 자료
댓글(0)
0
UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-326-002967093