메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색
질문

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국국제경제법학회 국제경제법연구 國際經濟法硏究 第2卷
발행연도
2004.12
수록면
91 - 123 (33page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색
질문

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The Korea-Beef case concerns Korean governmental measures affecting the importation of beef and domestic beef market, such as the agricultural support programs, restrictions on purchases and sales in the wholesale market, limitations on tendering opportunities of imported beef, and restrictions on discharge of imports. Among others, the dual retail system which requires imported beef to be sold in specialized beef stores, to separate sales areas for the sale of imported beef in department stores and to display an imported beef store sign had attracted most attention.
The dual retail system was challenged by the complaining party as a violation of GATT Article m:4 as resulting in less favorable treatment for imported beef and was counter-argued by Korea that this system was not discriminatory against imports, and even that case, it still could be defended on the ground of exercising legitimate governmental power according to the GATT Article XX (d). The Panel and the Appellate Body rejected the Korean argument and concluded that the Korean dual retail system was inconsistent with Article Ⅲ:4 due to the less favorable treatment of imported beef than like domestic beef, and could not be Justified under Articled XX (d).
In reaching the above decision regarding Article Ⅲ:4, the Panel and the Appellate Body followed a rather different line of reasoning but converged on the point that it is the protection of 'competitive conditions' that has to be examined and the Korean dual retail system altered the conditions less favorably of imported beef. With respect to the Article XX (d), the Korea-Beef case signals an important change of GATT/WTO jurisprudence in interpreting the term "necessary" in Article XX by introducing a 'weighing and balancing' concept, and thus relaxing the restrictive approach to the necessity test. Although the Korean system was not benefitted from this lax interpretation of 'necessary', this change nonetheless seems to have a significant impact on future cases.

목차

Ⅰ. 머리말
Ⅱ. 사건의 배경 및 사실관계
Ⅲ. 주요 쟁점별 판정내용 분석
Ⅳ. 판정 이행과정과 결과
Ⅴ. 사건의 사시점
參考文獻
Abstract

참고문헌 (0)

참고문헌 신청

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2010-361-002620798