WTO 보건 및 안전성 분쟁의 심리기준 결정

This article explores one of the most controversial topics in the WTO dispute settlement system. In the WTO jurisprudence or literature, no satisfying bright line rule has been developed to deal with the exclusion of the de nove review. This is significant since the difference in nature between the panel's de novo review or a more deferencial review is such that the lack of a standard would inevitably affect the security and predictability of the world system. After reviewing the Background, legal provisions as well as analyzing structure developed in the literature, this article suggests that general concept of standard of review involves the determination of the object of review and degree of rigidity the WTO adjusting bodies emply in reviewing the determined object. These two notions should be clearly distinguished. A two-step structure is proposed. As the first step, a panel should determine what is the proper object of the review according to the legal obligation at issue. This article suggests that it is not the appropriate standards as determined by all the relevant factor-the legal provisions at issue- that should determine whether the exclusion of de novo review is appropriate. As the second step, a panel should decide the appropriate degree of rigidity for its judicial review according to other relevant factors. Fiture works on th esecond step is needed in other to develop clearer and more predictable rules in this respect. After reviewinh the WTO jurisprudence, the article suggests that the WTO case law has adopted this method in trade remedy cases, and the recent trend shows that it has evolved into the review of SPS measures. This article believes that this trend of refinement, with due respect for the legal provisions, would contribute to the security and predictability of the WTO dispute settlement system, as well as the future development of the bright line rules in the anaysis of the standard of review.