IP & Art

Consented Decree means when a violation of the Fair Trade Act occurs, the violators voluntarily come up with a remedy for this, and accordingly, through continuous consultation with the relevant stakeholders, such as the victim, etc., the remedy will be amended or changed accordingly. 

This is truly an astonishing transformation. Unfortunately, however, it is truly regrettable that this new approach to the consent and resolution system is, in reality, somewhat inflexible and insufficiently utilized due to the lack of accurate understanding of its role.

Let's take a closer look at the court case. First of all, in the past, the human rights issue of the accused was the main concern in criminal proceedings, and this is still an important issue. 

This is because the role of the court in dispute resolution procedures such as civil and commercial disputes is closer to the service provider of dispute resolution services than to the activities of state power. Nevertheless, in a court that has been occupying a monopoly position in this role for a long time, judges or court officials are simply complacent in this monopoly position, and their awareness of their role as a service provider is substantially low.

In other words, in order to find ways to enhance the interests and convenience of judicial consumers in the level of thorough reflection and re-recognition of one's own role as a dispute resolution service provider, court reform has to be developed while constantly being self-reliant. This is so insufficient.

And further, in the prosecution reform, above all else, it must be re-established from the recognition of the role of a "people's lawyer" or "legal representative of the people" in the position and role of the prosecutor. In such a time, the Ministry of Justice, as a lawyer for the people, needs to focus more on the field of protecting, for example, collective legal victims. For example, in the recent humidifier case, criminal investigation and punishment are of course important, but in reality, the most important thing for victims is proper compensation or relief.

From that point of view, it is necessary to pay a special attention to the improvement of the system by filing a class action lawsuit or a class action lawsuit as a public lawyer in the Ministry of Justice, etc. In other words, effective institutional reform is needed so that there is no blind spot in the law between punishment for perpetrators and compensation or relief for victims.

It is also important to assign the role of the Ministry of Justice or prosecutors from a new perspective, such as having the Ministry of Justice take on the role of filing national representative lawsuits for victims, such as in the United States. To this end, above all else, it is absolutely necessary to change the perception of the prosecutor's own role as the people's lawyer, and further, to achieve this, a systematic improvement must be made.

Now, our mission will be the normalization of abnormalities and the establishment of a transparent society of openness and sharing through which sound common sense works. Above all, it is urgent to change one's own perception that it is best for all processes to be transparent, open, and shared. In particular, it is necessary to pay attention to the new paradigm of transparency, disclosure, and sharing by the block chain method and to adapt ourselves to it.

In order to properly respond to the changes in the era of the 4th industrial revolution, it is the most urgent task for the judicial field to stand upright above all else. To this end, it is urgent to re-recognize one's role based on thorough self-reflection in line with a new paradigm rather than a quick fix. And I look forward to setting the right direction based on this new awareness and pursuing it faithfully and continuously.