MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2123390675

가맹계약에서의 정보제공의무에 관한 연구

2004· article· ko· W2123390675 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
송인방

Bibliographic record

Venue기업법연구 · 2004
Typearticle
Languageko
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicDiverse Topics in Contemporary Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsRescissionMisrepresentationBusinessScrutinyFranchiseInterpretation (philosophy)DutyLaw and economicsAccountingLawEconomicsPolitical scienceMarketingComputer science
DOInot available

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

This article deals with the legal protection of franchisees in franchise contracts A franchise business is formed with a franchise contract between a franchiser and a franchisee, but the contract is usually made when the franchisee is in a disadvantageous economic and legal situation. Commonly, such a contract is one-sidedly advantageous to the franchiser and unfairly limits the franchisee's business. To protect the franchisee, it is important to improve the legal interpretation and application of the franchise contract. In this article, I explain the meaning and bases of the Franchise Disclosure Rule, and interpret positive Korean franchise contract law. I scrutinize the Korean regulations regarding franchise contract offer obligations with reference to cases in America, Canada, Japan and UNlDROT. Further, I support the view that to ensure that fair franchise contracts are made between franchisers and franchisees, general information about franchisers has to be open to public scrutiny. The Korean Franchise Disclosure Rule is especially focused on. Specifically, the article analyzes the duty to disclose information, and provides examples about disclosure, exemptions from the disclosure requirement, and the rescission of the franchise contracts for misrepresentation. The solutions to the problems of the current information franchise contract disclosure system are presented as follows. First, the contents of franchise contracts which are prescribed in information disclosure documents should be defined clearly so that there is no possibility of arbitrary interpretation. Second, in the application of information disclosures, procedural paperwork has to be reduced or abolished so that the information disclosure system can be applied effectively Third, the cooling off period for franchisees has to be extended 10 to 14 days Fourth, the location of the headquarters of franchises and the numbers of franchisees who have cancelled their contractshave to be disclosed to substantially protect prospective franchisees from false or exaggerated advertisements.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.004
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.039
Threshold uncertainty score0.131

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.004
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0030.001
Scholarly communication0.0040.003
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0390.014

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.110
GPT teacher head0.391
Teacher spread0.281 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2004
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venue기업법연구Same topicDiverse Topics in Contemporary ResearchFrench-language works237,207