부산대학교 도서관

China has carried out the One Country, Two System policy of national sovereignty with a different legal system in one country since the return of Hong Kong from the UK on July 1st, 1997, and Macao from Portugal on December 20th, 1999. The One Country, Two System policy, which is the basic principle of China's unification, refers to the establishment and operation of a special administrative district with capitalism system for a long time in one socialist state. From the perspective of Britain and Portugal, the reason why Chinese government performed this policy is because that, as socialist economic system, they are very worried about the return of capitalism Hong Kong and Macao. Considering these points, China accommodated the politics, economic and legal system of Hong Kong and Macao as it is on the condition of the sovereignty return through implicating the One Country, Two System policy. This system was originally designed by the Chinese government to solve the problem of unification with Taiwan, but it was first applied to solve the Hong Kong and Macao return problems. China and Taiwan have been separated since 1949 due to civil war. On January 1st, 1979, the Standing Committee of the National People's Congress of China declared "A Message to Compatriots in Taiwan" which suggested that they would change the policy toward Taiwan from military confrontation to peaceful unification through “three links and four communications” policy. Due to the political specificity among the four districts of Cross-Straits, China, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan have formed their independent and separate law zones. On the one hand, the economic trade among them has risen sharply due to the political and economic effects such as China’s reform and opening, China’s unification policy change towards Taiwan, and Hong Kong and Macao’s return to China. As a result of the economic trade increase, disputes among them have also increased. As a result, the use of the arbitration system as a means of resolving commercial disputes among them has also increased. Particularly, in order to avoid political uncertainty, the interested parties in China and Taiwan preferred the private dispute resolution method, usually, arbitration to the national power-based litigation when comes to resolving commercial disputes In other words, if the losing party voluntarily fulfills the arbitration award then the state will have little room for intervention in the commercial dispute. Given the uncertain political situation between China and Taiwan, it would be natural for the dispute parties preferring arbitration as a dispute resolution method. However, if the losing party refuses to perform the arbitration award, the prevailing party can apply for enforcement to the court where the losing party or its property is domiciled. In such case, the Chinese and Taiwanese courts will intervene in the execution of the arbitration award and which law to be enforced turns out to be a problem. In addition, since China has allowed Hong Kong and Macao to maintain their judicial systems as it is, the judicial barriers among them have been formed despite the fact that they are a single country. This means that the verdicts or rulings issued by courts and arbitration agencies among them cannot be approved or enforced in the other region. To solve this problem, China, Hong Kong and Macao have concluded agreement for the approval and enforcement of arbitral awards referred as "Arrangements of the Supreme People's Court on the Mutual Enforcement of Arbitral Awards between the Mainland and the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region", which is almost similar to the agreements concluded with other countries. This agreement allows for the independent enforcement of laws as well as swift approval and enforcement of arbitral awards among them. The approval and enforcement of the arbitration award among the four districts of Cross-Straits reflect the special relationship among them, and generally, they are very different from the international agreements and domestic laws applicable to foreign jurisdiction or domestic jurisdiction. This study analyzes the characteristics and problems related to the approval and enforcement of arbitration among China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macao. Based on this, this study proposes the precautions for the application of stable approval and enforcement of the arbitration award among them. In addition, the commercial dispute resolution tends to become more complicated and prolonged with a bigger trade size and more complicate trade patterns between Korea and them. Therefore, this study tries to state both the precautions and opportunities for Korea enterprises in the use of their arbitration systems. Finally, this study suggests implications for the establishment of regulations and systems related to the approval and enforcement of the arbitration award between South Korea and North Korea.