2016년 개정 중재법의 중재판정 집행에 관한 문제점

• 영문명: Problems on the Arbitral Awards Enforcement in the 2016 Korean Arbitration Act
• 발행기관: 한국중재학회
• 저자명: 윤진기(Jin-Ki Yoon)
• 간행물 정보: 『중재연구』 제26권 제4호, 3~41쪽, 전체 39쪽
• 주제분류: 사회과학 > 무역학
• 파일형태: PDF
• 발행일자: 2016.12.30

영문 초록

This paper reviews the problems on the arbitral awards enforcement in the 2016 Korean Arbitration Act. In order to get easy and rapid enforcement of the arbitral awards, the new arbitration act changed the enforcement procedure from an enforcement judgement procedure to an enforcement decision procedure. However, like the old arbitration act, the new act is still not arbitration friendly. First of all, there are various problems in the new act because it does not approve that an arbitral award can be a schuldtitel (title of enforcement) of which the arbitral award can be enforced. In this paper, several problems of the new act are discussed: effect of arbitral award, approval to res judicata of enforcement decision, different trial process and result for same ground, possibility of abuse of litigation for setting aside arbitral awards and delay of enforcement caused by setting aside, infringement of arbitration customer’s right to be informed, and non-internationality of enforcement of interim measures of protection, inter alia. The new arbitration act added a proviso on article 35 (Effect of Arbitral Awards). According to article 35 of the old arbitration act, arbitral awards shall have the same effect on the parties as the final and conclusive judgement of the court. The proviso of article 35 in the new act can be interpret two ways: if arbitral awards have any ground of refusal of recognition or enforcement according to article 38, the arbitral awards do not have the same effect on the parties as the final and conclusive judgement of the court; if arbitral awards have not recognised or been enforced according to article 38, the arbitral awards do not have the same effect on the parties as the final and conclusive judgement of the court. In the case of the former, the parties cannot file action for setting aside arbitral awards in article 36 to the court, and this is one of the important problems of the new act. In the new act, same ground of setting aside arbitral awards can be tried in different trial process with or without plead according to article 35 and 37. Therefore, progress of enforcement decision of arbitral awards can be blocked by the action of setting aside arbitral awards. If so, parties have to spend their time and money to go on unexpected litigation.In order to simplify enforcement procedure of arbitral awards, the new act changed enforcement judgement procedure to enforcement decision procedure. However, there is still room for the court to hear a case in the same way of enforcement judgement procedure. Although the new act simplifies enforcement procedure by changing enforcement judgement procedure to enforcement decision procedure, there still remains action of setting aside arbitral awards, so that enforcement of arbitral awards still can be delayed by it. Moreover, another problem exists in that the parties could have to wait until a seventh trial (maximum) for a final decision. This result in not good for the arbitration system itself in the respect of confidence as well as cost. If the arbitration institution promotes to use arbitration by emphasizing single-trial system of arbitration without enough improvement of enforcement procedure in the arbitration system, it would infringe the arbitration customer’s right to be informed, and further raise a problem of legal responsibility of arbitration institution. With reference to enforcement procedure of interim measures of protection, the new act did not provide preliminary orders, and moreover limit the court not to recognize interim measures of protection done in a foreign country. These have a bad effect on the internationalization of the Korean arbitration system.

목차

Ⅰ. 서 론

Ⅱ. 중재판정 집행절차의 문제점에 대한 논의와 주요 개선 내용

Ⅲ. 개정 중재법의 중재판정 집행절차와 관련된 문제점

Ⅳ. 결 론

키워드

Arbitration Act Arbitration Arbitral Award Arbitral Award Enforcement Procedure Enforcement Judgement Procedure Enforcement Decision Prodecure Setting Aside of Arbitral Awards Moral of Arbitration Schuldtitel Right to be Informed