국제통상분쟁의 사법적해결과 입증책임

The WTO dispute settlement system improved the procedural problems of the past GATT through a decision-making method as a “reverse consensus” and laid the foundation for better expressing the characteristics of the judicial dispute resolution system. At the same time, the WTO dispute settlement system established a more judicial framework for dispute resolution through the establishment of a standing “Appellate Body” such as the domestic judicial system. The WTO Members’ efforts for judicial resolution of international trade disputes have an important meaning in terms of “fairness” in dispute settlement. However, it was raised through the issues of burden of proof that the “fairness” of the WTO dispute settlement procedure as a system for judicial resolution of international trade disputes does not provide procedural “fairness” in the actual dispute resolution process. As such, the issues of the burden of proof raised according to the interpretation of the current WTO appellate body may eventually weaken the judicial character of the WTO dispute settlement system. The solution to this problem eventually returns to the smooth operation of the WTO dispute resolution system. The WTO Dispute Settlement Organization applies the principle of “jura novit curia.” This means that the WTO's panel and appellate body are responsible for answering the questions posed by the current confusion caused by the problems of burden of proof.