본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

자유무역협정에 따른 세이프가드조치의 차별적 적용과 최혜국대우

Discriminatory application of Safeguard Measures in Regional Trade Agreements and Most-Favored Nation

성재호|채은선
법무부 (Ministry of Justice)|2010.02|국제법무연구 (Journal of International Legal Affairs)|제91호|pp. 10-49

0

조회

0

다운로드

1

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

최혜국대우non-discrimination지역무역협정세이프가드safeguardRegional Trade Agreement비차별양적제한most-favored-nation treatment principlequantitative restriction‘parallelism’
주제분류법학

초록

오늘날 통상은 최혜국대우를 근간으로 하는 WTO 체제를 중심으로 이루어지고 있다. 최혜국대우는 국가들이 동등한 조건으로 공정하고 자유로운 무역을 할 수 있도록하는 다자주의의 핵심원리이다. 지역무역협정은 그 속성이 차별적이나 다자주의와 병행하여 WTO/GATT과 상호보완하는 역할을 하리라는 기대로 GATT 체제와 WTO 체제 수용되어 합법적으로 인정되어 왔다. 최근 자유무역협정은 관세동맹보다 완화된 체결요건과 도하개발아젠다의 부진 등 여러 복합적 요인으로 인해 어느 때보다 선호되고 있다. 이로 인해 여러 문제점이 지적되고 있으나, 그 중에서도 다자주의의 근간인 최혜국대우원칙이 훼손되고 있다는 점이 WTO/GATT에서 최혜국대우원칙이 차지하는 비중으로 인해 중대한 문제로 대두되고있다. 이와 관련하여 WTO 내에서도 여러 분쟁을 통해 WTO/GATT 최혜국대우원칙이 훼손되는 문제가 노출되어 왔는데, 그 중에서도 최혜국대우원칙이 반영된 세이프가드조치와 관련한 분쟁은 자유무역혐정의 차별성과 더불어 복잡한 양상을 보여주고 있다. WTO 자유무역협정과 세이프가드와 관련한 분쟁들은 구성국간에는 세이프가드를취하지 않으려는 시도를 해왔으며, 그 근거는 자유무역협정 상의 세이프가드조치 규정인 글로벌조치 내지 구성국간 세이프가드조치를 금지하고 있는 규정이었다. 이에 이들 분쟁은 최혜국대우관련 규정인 GATT 제1조 및 제13조, 세이프가드조치 관련 규정인 제19조와 세이프가드협정 제2조 2항 및 인과관계규정, GATT 제24조와 세이프가드조치 관련 규정간 관계 등이 주로 다루어져 오고 있다. 분쟁해결기구는 사안을 해결하기 위해 ‘parallelism’과 비기여요소 분석을 개진하여 왔는데, 이들 논리는 사안을 해결하는데 근본적인 해결책이 되지 못한다는 비난을 받아오고 있다. 또한 최혜국대우가 체화된 WTO/GATT 세이프가드의 비차별적 적용에 많은 허점을 보여주고 있다. 제소국입장이었던 우리나라도 자유무역협정 체결의 증가로 피제소국 입장이 될 수 있다는인식하에 이러한 문제의식을 갖고 보다 면밀히 검토해보고자 하였다.

Abstract

From GATT to WTO, international trade has been based on most-favored nation treatment principle(MFN). MFN is a cornerstone of WTO which makes WTO members to play equitably and fairly. GATT and WTO have provisions to accommodate regional trade agreements(RTAs) legally, expecting them complement GATT and WTO. Recently RTAs, especially free trade agreements(FTAs) are proliferating much more than ever. Therefore MFN seems to be eroded. A lawyer expressed his concern that MFN was not the rule any more, that is almost the exception. WTO/GATT disputes concerning safeguard measures have reflected that such problems are complex and difficult to solve due to RTA's nature, discrimination. Some cases show that RTA constituents to take safeguard measure try and want to leave out the other constituents of the same FTA from WTO/GATT safeguard measure. Actually their intention is to comply obligation under global safeguard action clause or provisions to prevent or eliminate safeguard measures between FTA constituents. As a result of that, their action was decided to be against GATT article 1, 13, and 19 and Safeguard Agreement article 2.2 and 4.2. WTO panel and appellate body have developed some reasoning to deal with problems concerning to safeguard, FTA, and MFN. It is called as 'parallelism' and non-attribution analysis. But these methods have proved to be not enough to solve the case,so many lawyers criticised those. Korea has concluded several FTAs and is preparing some FTAs, most of which have global safeguard provisions. So the theme of this article is helpful for Korea to confront similar situations.

참고문헌 (57)

  1. 성재호, "국제경제법, 개정판" (2006), 박영사
  2. Hoekman, Bernard M., "The Political Economy of the World Trading System, Second Edition" (2001), Oxford University Press
  3. Barton, John, "International Trade and Investment: Regulating International Business, Second Edition" (1986), Brown
  4. The World Trading System, "Jackson, John Howard", MIT, ~ (1997)
  5. Evans, John W., "The Kennedy Round in American Trade Policy: The Twilight of the GATT?" (1971), Harvard University Press
  6. Marco Bronckers, "Selective Safeguard Measures in Multilateral Trade Relations" (1985), Springer
  7. The Law and Policy of the World Trade Organization Text, cases, and Materials, "Bossche, Peter Van den", Cambridge, ~ (2007)
  8. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade: A Commentary, "Mavroidis, Petros C.", Oxford, ~ (2005)
  9. Trebilcock, Michael J., "The Regulation of International Trade, Second Edition" (2001), Routledge
  10. Lee, Yong-Shik, "Safeguard Measures in World Trade The Legal Analysis" (2007), Kluwer Law International BV
  11. Ahn, Dukgeun, "Restructuring the WTO Safeguard System. in: The WTO Trade Remedy System: East Asia Perspectives" (2006), Cameron
  12. Sykes, Alan 0., "Protectionism as a ‘Safeguard’: A Positive Analysis of the GATT 'Escape Clause' with Normative Speculations", University of Chicago Law Review, 58 (1991)
  13. Turinov, Anna, "Free Trade Agreements In The World Trade Organization: The Experience of East Asia and The Japan-Mexico Economic Partnership Agreement", UCLA Pacific Basin Law Journal, 25 (2007)
  14. Tan, Austine, "Payments Imbalances Sudden Surges", World Economy, 12 (1989)
  15. Irwin, Douglas A., "The GATT in Historical Perspective", American Economic Review, 85 (1995)
  16. Spabio, Fabio, "Discriminatory Safeguards in the Light of the Admission of the People's Republic of China to the World Trade Organization", Journal of International Economic Law, 5 (2002)
  17. Sayre, Francis B., "The Most-Favored-Nation Policy in Relation to Trade Agreements", American Political Science Review, 33 (1939)
  18. United States-Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Certain Steel Products(US-Steel Products), (WT, "DS259; WT", DS252; WT, DS249; WT, pp.DS251; WT, DS258; WT[DOI]
  19. Viner, Jacob, "The Most-Favored-Nation Clause in American Commercial Treaties", Journal of Political Economy, 32 (1924)
  20. Pauwelyn, Joost, "The Puzzle of WTO Safeguard and Regional Trade Agreement", Journal of International Economic Law (2004)
  21. Brand, Joseph L., "The New World of Regional Trading Blocs", American University Journal of International Law and Policy, 8 (1992)
  22. Dam, Kenneth W., "The GATT: Law and International Economic Organization. in: Regional Trade Agreements and Domestic Regulation. in: Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO Legal System" (2006), Oxford
  23. Lewis, Meredith Kolsk, "The Prisoners' Dilemma and FTAs: Applying Game Theory to Trade Liberalization Stratergy. in: Challenges to Multilateral Trade: The Impact of Bilateral, Preferential and Regional Agreements" (2008), Kluwer Law International BV
  24. Michael Ewing-Chow, "Southeast Asia and Free Trade Agreements : WTO Plus or Bust?", Singapore Year Book of International Law and Contributors, 8 (2004)
  25. Wickersham, Mr., "Report of the Sub-Committee on The Most-Favored-Nation Treatment", Special Number American Journal of International Law Special Supplement, 22 (1928)
  26. Comparing safeguard measures in regional and bilateral agreements, "Kruger, Paul", International Centre for Trade and Sustainable Development, ~, pp.Issue Paper No. 22 (2009)
  27. The Future of the WTO: Addressing Institutional Challenges in the New Millennium, Report by the Consultative Board to the Director-General Supachai Panitchpakdi, "Sutherland, Peter", World Trade Organization, ~ (2004)
  28. Wright, Quincy, "The Most-Favored-Nation Clause", American Journal of International Law, 21 (1927)
  29. Pomfret, Richard, "The Economics of Regional Trading Arrangements 71. in: Weak Discipline:GATT Article ⅩⅩⅣ and the Emerging WTO Jurisprudence on RTAs", North Dakota Law Review, 79 (2003)
  30. Olson, Ruth E., "GATT-Legal Application of Safeguards in the Context of Regional Trade Arrangements and its Implications for the Canada-United States Free Trade Agreement", Minnesota Law Review, 73 (1988)
  31. Cho, Sungjoon, "Breaking the Barrier between Regionalism and Multilateralism:A New Perspective on Trade Regionalism", Harvard International Law, 42 (2001)
  32. Cottier, Thomas, "The Erosion of Non-Discrimination: Stern Warning Without True Remedies", Journal of International Economic Law, 8 (2005)
  33. Constitutional Functions of the WTO and Regional Trade Agreements. in: Regional Trade Agreements and the WTO Legal System, "Cottier, Thomas", Oxford, ~ (2006)
  34. The World Bank, "Trade Blocs", ~ (2001)
  35. Maruyama, Warren H., "The Wonderful World of VRAS: Free Trade and The Goblet of Fire: Symposium -- The WTO at 10 and the Road to Hong Kong Article", Arizona Journal of International and Comparative Law, 24 (2007)
  36. Choi, Won-Mog, "Legal Problems of Making Regional Trade Agreements with Non-WTO-Member Mtates", Journal of International Economic Law, 8 (2005)
  37. Hafez, Zakir, "Weak Discipline:GATT Article ⅩⅩⅣ and the Emerging WTO Jurisprudence on RTAs", North Dakota Law Review, 79 (2003)
  38. Report adopted on 18 June 1980, Norway-Restriction on Imports of Certain Textile Products(Norway-Textile), , ~, pp.L (1980), 4959-27S[DOI]
  39. EEC–Imports from Hong Kong(Panel on Quantitative Restrictions against Imports of Certain Products from Hong Kong, adopted Panel Report on 12 July 1983), , ~, pp.L (1983), 5511-30S[DOI]
  40. Panel Report adopted on 31 May 1999, Turkey-Restrictions on Imports of Textile and Clothing Products(Turkey-Textiles), , ~, pp.WT (1999), DS34[DOI]
  41. Appellate Body Report adopted on 22 October 1999, Turkey-Restrictions on Imports of Textile and Clothing Products(Turkey-Textiles), , ~, pp.WT (1999), DS34[DOI]
  42. Panel Report adopted on 25 June 1999, Argentina–Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear(Argentina-Footwear), , ~, pp.WT (1999), DS121[DOI]
  43. Appellate Body Report adopted on 14 December 1999, Argentina–Safeguard Measures on Imports of Footwear(Argentina-Footwear), , ~, pp.WT (1999), DS121[DOI]
  44. Appellate Body Report adopted on 22 December 2000, United States-Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Wheat Gluten from the European Communities(US-Wheat Gluten), , ~, pp.WT (2000), DS166[DOI]
  45. Panel Report adopted on 29 October 2001, United States-Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Welded Carbon Quality Line Pipe from Korea(US-Line Pipe), , ~, pp.WT (2001), DS202
  46. Appellate Body Report adopted on 15 February 2002, United States-Definitive Safeguard Measures on Imports of Welded Carbon Quality Line Pipe from Korea(US-Line Pipe), , ~, pp.WT (2002), DS202[DOI]
  47. Free Trade Agreement Between the Republic of Korea and chile, Questions and Replies, , ~, pp.WT (2006), REG169[DOI]
  48. Note by the Chairman, Guidelines on Procedures to Improve and Facilitate the Examination Process, , ~, pp.WT (1997), REG[DOI]
  49. Transparency Mechanism for regional trade agreements, Decision of 14 December 2006, "WTO", ~, pp.WT (2006), L[DOI]
  50. Japan's View on the Multilateral Safeguard System, , ~, pp.MTN (1976), SG[DOI]
  51. "Dictionary of Trade Policy Terms(Fourth Edition)" (2003)
  52. "외교통상부 자유무역협정 홈페이지, 2006.8 한미FTA용어집", 외교통상부[URL]
  56. "Evolution of Regional Trade Agreements in the world"[URL]
  57. "Press/243(2001)"[URL]

관련 논문AI추천

지역무역협정 세이프가드 규정의 차별성과 GATT 제24조 제한적 통상규칙성재호, 채은선법무부 · 국제법무연구2009 · 제88호국제무역체제의 탄력장치: GATT체제에서 WTO체제로의 이행과 이후 변화에 대한 연구문돈세종연구소 · 국가전략2005 · 제11권 제2호Proposals to Safeguard Measures in Korea’s Future Preferential Trade Agreements김호, 김봉철한국학중앙연구원 · Korea Journal2017 · 제57권 제2호GATT 제XX조 일반적 예외의 해석상 한계와 지역무역협정의 대안적 접근이길원법학연구원 · 성균관법학2025 · 제37권 제3호WTO 세이프가드 조치의 이행타당성에 대한 분석최보빈, 최창환무역구제학회 · 무역구제연구2023 · 제67호WTO 最惠國待遇原則과 南北韓交易의 調和안형도대외경제정책연구원 · East Asian Economic Review1998 · 제2권 제1호

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (3건)

리스본조약과 EU의 조약체결권 - 한-EU FTA 비준 절차를 중심으로 -채형복pp. 50-77국제상거래상 Frustration이론에 관한 고찰한낙현, 허윤석pp. 78-104A Study on the Seller’s Obligation to Deliver the Goods under the PELS오원석, 이병문pp. 105-139
원문 보기