http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.
변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.
- 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
- 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
- 검색키워드
- 저자 : 조성제 (검색결과 49 건)
-
-
-
계층화분석기법(AHP)을 활용한 여수 크루즈 관광의 특성 분석
조성제 세종대학교 관광대학원 2021 국내석사
근래 아시아 지역은 빠른 경제성장과 여가에 대한 비중이 높아, 여유로운 삶에 대한 욕구가 증가하면서 크루즈 여행 또한 관심도가 증가하는 상황이다. 최근 한국, 중국, 일본을 연계한 동북아 크루즈 시장의 규모가 지속 확대됨에 따라 글로벌 선사들도 한국, 중국, 일본 크루즈 시장의 진출을 적극적으로 모색하였다. 이에 동북아의 주요 항만들도 신규 성장동력으로 크루즈 산업을 주목하고 있으며, 인프라 확충 및 크루즈 산업과 연계산업을 육성하기 위해 힘을 쏟고 있다. 시장 성장에 따라 여수항은 일본과 중국의 가운데 위치하는 이점이 있으며, 글로벌 수준의 인프라 시설을 구비하는 등 기항지로서 높은 잠재력을 가지고 있다. 그러나, 이러한 강점에도 불구하고 여수항은 아직 답보상태에 머물러 있는 상황이다. 지금이라도 한국의 대표 기항지 중 하나인 여수를 아시아의 주요 기항지로 육성시키기 위한 전략이 시급히 요구되는 바이다. 본 연구에서는 현 시점에서 기항지로서 여수항을 전략적으로 포지션을 정립하고, 국내 타기항지와의 경쟁력이 제고 될 수 있는 전략을 도출하는데 목표를 두고 있다. 아쉽게도 코로나19라는 악재로 인해 크루즈 관광객을 대상으로 심층적인 분석을 위한 설문조사를 할 수는 없었지만, 계층화분석기법(AHP)를 활용하여 국내 크루즈 전문가 집단 30인을 통해 여수항에 대한 문제점이 우선적으로 개선되어야 하는 사항에 대해서 설문조사를 실시하였다. 그 결과로, AHP 설문의 결과로 도출된 1위 출입국분리 운영, 2위 재정적 지원, 3위 세일즈 홍보마케팅, 4위 무료셔틀버스 운영, 5위 오프라인 홍보, 그 외 순번으로 안내책자 제공, 추가선석 구축, 안내요원 지원, 환영행사 제공, 이동수단 지원, 온라인 홍보, 쉼터공간 확장의 순으로 상대적 우선순위가 결정되었다. 이번 연구결과를 통해 여수항은 크루즈 관광지로서 충분한 잠재력을 가지고 있음이 파악되었으며, 우선순위로 도출된 개선사항을 순차적으로 해결해 나간다면, 여수항은 단순 기항뿐만 아니라 모항사업도 충분히 가능한 점을 알 수 있다.
-
The first line of antiviral immune defense in higher eukaryotes is dependent upon a rapid activation of latent transcription factors to drive the expression of antiviral genes and the production of α- and β-interferon (IFN). IFN-stimulated gene products limit virus replication and serve to modulate the adaptive immune response. So expression of IFN is very important for our antiviral immune defense [1,2]. Retinoic acid-inducible gene I (RIG-I) is known as an intra-cellular sensor of virus infection [3]. The ATPase RIG-I, an IFN-inducible protein that consists of caspase recruitment domains (CARDs) and helicase domain, has been identified as double-stranded RNA or 5'-triphosphates single stranded RNA detector and Repression domain (RD). RIG-I senses various types of viruses, Hepatitis C virus, Sendai virus, influenza virus, vesicular stomatitis virus, rabies virus, and Japanese encephalitis virus [5]. RIG-I is imperative for induction of IFN-I in response to Influenza A virus (IAV). NS1 protein of AIV suppresses induction of INF-I by targeting and inactivating the RIG-I-dependent signaling pathway. So we studied the interaction between RIG-I and NS1 of Avian Influenza virus (A/HK/483/1997 (H5N1)) by Enzyme Linked Immunosorbent Assay (ELISA). Our results show that RIG-I full-length specifically binds to the NS1 of AIV ( KD = 40 nM ) in the presence of polyI:C, but does not bind in the absence of RNA. And we have shown that helicase domain of RIG-I is determined as NS1-binding region by ELISA.
-
조성제 한남대학교 학제신학대학원 2012 국내석사
호주 연합교회의 연합형성에 관한 연구로서 감리교회, 회중교회, 장로교회가 연합하여 호주 연합교단을 이루어가는 과정과 연합의 기초를 이룬 배경 그리고 호주연합교회에 대한 이해를 돕는 내용을 담고 있다. This study is regarding formation of an Australian Uniting Church process and structure. Specially, I will be studied how an Australian Uniting Church composed with background. I will apply it while research to theories a viewpoint to study structure of a Uniting church which “Culture is affected it to a development structural the church.” I will try to know a characteristic of Australian culture in order to understand a Australian Uniting church and I affect it to church structure of a combination platform Australian social the equality that is a basic characteristic equality cultural artist of Australian culture how and I achieve equality culture structure and I will be studied It. 1. I analyze it as dividing a formation process of a Uniting Church to cultural factors and theology factors. 2. A church to inquire into Ecumenical Movement has risen agree any in a Uniting Church’s direction and background arrange in chronological order and analyze it and I will be looked into the Ecumenical Movement to have caused it in a Uniting Church that has risen. 3. I will recognize negotiation process toward a combination of a Uniting Church by steps 4. I analyze structure of a Uniting Church to viewpoints main cultural and equality. 5. I will be look through Psychiatry and Theology of a Uniting Church of multicultural (cross-cultural) consideration and viewpoints of Public theology. For study a Uniting Church in Australia which purpose is to promote understanding with a Korean church and Uniting Church in Australia this paper. Specially, I do to important purposes that I help growth and develops of a Korean church in Australia and Australian church.
-
-
-
The thesis aims to examine statutes in relation to investigation procedure and whether the principle of lawful procedure is implemented in areas where citizens’ basic rights are often infringed upon. Ways to amend and implement the existing investigation procedure laws in accordance to the constitutional the due process of law are suggested as follows. First, when a suspect’s immediate attendance is required, giving the suspect sufficient time to acquire appropriate defense is needed. A provision stipulating such a time allowance in related laws and regulations is desirable. Second, a legislation to control warrants during emergency arrests is needed. Code of criminal procedure before 1995 stipulates that a warrant is required before emergency arrests, but since 1995, only an approval from a public prosecutor is needed instead of a warrant. This forfeit of the judge’s judgment in the procedure is not only a significant retrogression but also a violation of the Constitution, as the Article 12 Clause 3 clearly mandates a warrant issued by a judge when restricting a citizen. Third, creating a second clause to Article 308 to 2007 code of criminal procedure and stipulating that evidence collected by unlawful procedure be invalidated is recommended. Article 12 Clause 7 has potential to misinterpret the voluntariness of one’s confession as valid evidence and therefore should be amended to read, “when the suspect’s confession is thought to be elicited through violence, threat, restraint or deception, it shall not be used as evidence of conviction or prosecution.” Moreover, Article 309 should also be amended to read, “When the suspect’s confession had been elicited by means of torture, violence, threat or physical restraint, it cannot be used as evidence of conviction,” or be deleted, as the new second clause of Article 208 will guarantee the due process of law. Fourth, to ensure that working rules of human rights protection in investigations are adhered in regards to night investigations and break times, requiring a written explanation in exceptional cases of nighttime questioning is desirable. Also, making investigation between midnight and 6:00 am illegal is recommended. Fifth, interrogatory completed by public prosecutor can exercise evidentiary validity only when the suspect admits the content in court, as in the case of interrogatories completed by police officers. Sixth, in regards to restriction on attorney’s participation, a liberal interpretation of injustice in interrogation practices and precedents that allows broader range of participation of attorneys and limiting the restraints on attorneys is recommended. Also, divulgement of confidential information as a just cause to restrict attorney’s participation is too abstract and prone to misinterpretation. As to what constitutes confidential information depends on the investigating agency, it is highly likely that the attorney’s presence be denied according to the agency’s arbitrary will. Accumulation of such precedents will take considerable time, which may infringe upon the principle of definitude of the Constitution. Seventh, since the current statutes do not require a warrant for emergency arrests, criteria of the crime’s gravity ? a pre?requisite for emergency arrests ? should be made more stringent. Eighth, in light of the fact that the arrestment system’s main purpose is to have the suspect in custody and to prevent abuse of emergency arrests, a lax operation of the arrestment system is recommended. Removing refusal to attend or concerns of such refusals from reasons for arrest is also recommended, as it contributes to establishment of the due process of law. Ninth, the code of criminal procedure revised in 2007 established new considerations for judging reasons of arrest. However, these regulations are inadequate as they are very abstract and lack meaning beyond setting an approximate range of reasons. Also, the criminal action regulations revised on December 31st, 2007 does not stipulate detailed rules on these considerations. For laws that physically restraint citizens to be more constitutionally lawful, the revised regulations must be more substantive and detailed. Tenth, considering the criticism that distinction between detention and arrestment system only confuses the investigation agency when it comes to discerning when to use each and criterion for issuance of each, the current regulations of physical restraint needs to be consolidated. If the investigation agency attains a documented warrant of arrest prior to emergency arrests and proceeds to attain a warrant of detention, the court can then interrogate the suspect in order to establish just cause of arrest. Such an amendment does not run counter to the principle of lawful criminal procedure and still achieve the goals of the current law. Eleventh, the code of criminal procedure revised in 2007 states in Article 214 Section 2 Clause 4 that a court which has received requests for inspection of propriety of arrest or detention needs to interrogate the arrested or detained suspect within 48 hours of the request. Also, the criminal proceedings regulation revised on December 31st, 2007 no longer contains Article 103, which had decided date of interrogation (removed on October 29th, 2007) and instead provides the court to order the suspect’s and attorney’s attendance at a predetermined time and date “without delay.” Such language is dissonant with the 48 hours prescribed in Article 214 and is not adhering by the rule of the Supreme Court. Twelfth, the aforementioned 2007 revision of Article 214 Section 2 Clause 4 mandates an inspection of propriety upon 48 hours of its request in arrestment and detention. Prior to the revision, arrestment and detention propriety was to be inspected within 24 hours and 72 hours, respectively. The revision changed the arrestment inspection to be lengthened to 48 hours and detention inspection to be shortened to 48 hours. Since protection of citizens’ rights and the due process of law are more aptly protected when the arrested suspect is interrogated as soon as possible, both inspection time periods should be amended to be within 24 hours. Thirteenth, the 2007 revision of criminal procedure law has not changed from the previous version in that it only allows propriety inspection requests from suspects, not those already imprisoned. However, no distinction is needed between a suspect and a prisoner when inspecting whether they have been wrongly charged for a crime and the option of parole does not sufficiently address the problem. Moreover, while there may be just grounds for arrest or detention at the time of arrest, it may not be needed during court proceedings and therefore qualify the suspect the presumption of innocence and the right to request propriety inspection. Fourteenth, as the Constitution’s Article 12 Clause 7 “convict’s confession” can be interpreted as “suspect’s or convict’s confession,” Article 12 Clause 4’s “criminal convict” need not be subject to a narrow interpretation. Including ‘suspects’ will better protect the rights of citizens as well as implementation of a lawful procedure. Thus, all suspects arrested or detained must have access to a state?appointed attorney. Regardless of need, the State must guarantee a minimal substantive defense against criminal proceedings for all arrested or detained suspects. Those who deem such provision to be inadequate can personally seek legal defense. Fifteenth, there is room for debate on whether an infringement of right to interview by an investigation agency can be qualified as an alienation from the Constitution. Right to interview between a suspect under physical restraint and his/her attorney is considered a basic right under the Constitution and therefore counts as a violation of the Constitution. However, when there are other legislations providing for a relief procedure, the investigative agency’s infringement of right to interview cannot be directly held responsible for violating the Constitution, as it needs to undergo the appeal procedure and meet the supplementary requirements. Also, the appeal procedure will accompany a court trial but since court trial is exempt from alienation from the Constitution, it ultimately cannot be qualified as an alienation (Constitutional Trial Law Article 68 Clause 1). But when the infringement of basic rights in court trials is affirmed, a new law that addresses these problems need to be implemented. Even if the due process of law is upheld, approving the validity of unlawfully collected evidence or not holding responsible those public servants who do not follow the due process of law will make eradication of illegal investigation practices impossible. Accordingly, not only should the due process of law be held in high importance but also ways to implement these lawful investigation practices are required. The following recommendations aim to remedy some of the existing problems. 1) Criminal procedure law Article 308 Section 2 in 2007 revision codified the principle of invalidating unlawfully collected evidence ? this seems to be the most corrective and effective solution to eliminated illegal investigative practices. 2) Reinforcement of public trials will significantly lessen the violation of human rights and ensure lawful implementation of criminal procedures. 3) Although the current fiscal restraints and unavailability of attorneys makes its realization difficult, enlargement of state?appointed legal defense and participation of attorneys will be a preventive solution to unlawful criminal proceedings. 4) Stringent punishment of public servants who has committed illegal investigation is needed. 본 연구에서는 어떻게 하면 수사절차에서 가혹수사 등 국민의 인권이 침해되는 수사관행을 근절할 수 있을까에 그 목적을 두었다. 헌법상의 적법절차원리가 국민들의 법의식속에 보편성을 가짐과 동시에 뿌리 깊게 받아들여지며 교육되어지고, 아울러 형사절차에 관한 입법과 수사관행에 적법절차원리가 구체화됨으로 인권침해의 수사관행 근절이 가능하다고 생각한다. 국민들의 법의식속에 헌법상 적법절차원리가 제대로 자리 잡게 하기 위해서는 적법절차원리의 기원?발전과 우리 헌법상의 수용과정과 그 전개에 대한 충분한 연구가 먼저 이루어져야 한다고 생각한다. 수사절차에 관한 법령에 대해서는 최근 2007년 형사소송법과 형사소송규칙 등에서 피의자 인권을 강화하는 방향으로 관련규정이 개정되었지만 적법절차원리에 비추어 볼 때 미흡한 부분이 많다. 따라서 수사절차에 관한 법령에 헌법상 적법절차원리가 제대로 구체화되어 있는지 헌법상 적법절차원리에 비추어 그 개정방향과 입법방향을 제시하였다.
-
行政訴訟上 臨時救濟에 관한 硏究 : 行政訴訟法 改正案을 中心으로
For administrative action, it admits authentication and self-executive force that is different from civil expression of will in order to smooth conduct of administrative purpose so that there are many cases that enforcement may complete if it waits until merits judgement Therefore, in order to obtain the effectiveness of the merits judgment, the necessity of temporary relief is higher than the case of civil proceeding. The necessity of temporary relief is increased when disadvantage of holder's administrative disposition becomes serious or the application of administrative action is irreversible The problem of temporary relief about infringement administration is whether it can deter making the fact that can not be restituted before the original lawsuit is completed or temporarily benefits can admit given status about the area of benefits administration. That is, suspension of execution among temporary relief performs prevention of being fulfilled due to illegal administrative acts, and provisional disposition plays an effective role in benefits administration. This paper compares and reviews the function of prevention of being fulfilled due to illegal administration acts through temporary relief, especially suspension of execution, and after that, it will review the plan how unrecoverable damages will recover through the final judgment, especially revocation judgment. It is questionable that Korea's temporary relief performs well about removing unrecoverable damages completely for revocation judgment. Because the basic attitude of Korea's legislative and judiciary is characterized that executive's minimal intervention through judiciary in the name of separation of powers, and as a result, people does not receive sufficient right remedies through judiciary. As a result, there are some defects cases occurs even if the remedy is quarantined at the original lawsuit. Looking for the status of a temporary relief defects in detail, About the bearing administrative disposition, though the regulation of current Article 23 of Administrative Litigation Law's suspension of execution is set, temporary relief can't saved when unrecoverable damages are occurred before suspension of execution decision after administrative disposition. In addition, about the refusal disposition and omissions of beneficiary administrative disposition, temporary relief system is not prepared yet, and orthodoxy or judicial case have an opinion that administrative office has the right of beneficiary administrative disposition so that it is skeptical for admitting temporary relief about disposal or omission under current law. After all, for the formation of appropriate temporary relief system, especially for a complete recovery of the unrecoverable damages that are from revocation judgment about illegal administrative disposition or bearing administrative disposition, First, the case that can't be a original lawsuit, it is impossible to be a temporary relief in principle, so it is need to expand a original lawsuit for the sake of expanding temporary relief. Second, the damages that can't recover from temporary relief and revocation judgment, it has to be recovered through monetary compensation, and it should be same process as temporary relief and revocation judgment in terms of efficient of recovered damages and one-time dispute resolution. For the complete removal of illegal fact of the state that is occurred by making administrative disposition except effect of retroactively exclusion, the possibility is uncertain that temporary relief has to play an active role by applying it that temporary relief is stopping or at least preventing the fact of the state on the front. Specifically 1. For the sake of complete protection of right, there are ways to defer the self-executive administrative disposition's imperative bearing effect occurrence time and ordered administrative disposition's enforcement commencement time. Shortly after administrative disposition, without giving other party enough opportunity for protection of right, in case of imminent execution or forcedly execution even though other party suits administrative dispute, only if administrative disposition's imminent execution does unrecoverable damages to other party due to the execution that is not needed for public interest, suspension of execution decision, the same meaning of provisional decision can be made with discretion abuse by administration office's execution. 2. With remaining damages claims by a new substantive enactment, about judgment of the merits' judicial decision, it would be able to judge the payment of liquidated damages as well as revocation. As a special form of litigation merge follow-up action in case of quoting decision about suspension of execution application, within the litigation on the merits of a case, the introduction of enforcement are necessary for administrative office's execution of profits return claims for private person. And, to make sure the recovery of post-damage of public interest, deposit or collateral provision are required. 3. Above discussion are generally applied priority for illegal administrative disposition or bearing administrative disposition, About benefits administration or beneficial disposal , through existing revision and revised proposal in 2013 by the Ministry of Justice's created provisional disposition for the complement of right remedy's defect. There is a consensus about adopting proposal, expecially a lawsuit against third parties administrative disposal to create collateral provision regulation for the sake of protecting third party so that it is evaluated meaningful. Nevertheless, now that establishing enactment, if we can more precise legislative system, it is considered that the revised Administrative Procedure Act proposal can contribute expansion of people's right remedy, Regarding evocation litigation, it only regulates suspension of execution, if suspension of execution condition is acknowledged, in addition to it, tentative performance of obligation is ordered, and separate regulation of provisional disposition about performance of obligation lawsuit shall conform to the system of lawsuit appeal.
-
연관 검색어 추천
이 검색어로 많이 본 자료
활용도 높은 자료
