현재 각 시·도 지차체의 국도 70%이상이 불투수성 면적이며, 불투수성 면적의 증가는 우천 시 수막현 상으로 인한 교통사고, 도시형 우심 피해 증가, 하천수의 감소, 지하수의 고갈 등의 물 순환 문제와 열섬 현상을 발생시키는 주요 원인으로 지목받고 있다. 이러한 시점에서 투수성 포장은 도로 및 보도에 사용이 많이 이루어 졌으나 기존의 밀입도 포장에 비해 인위적으로 형성시킨 공극으로 인하여 강우 및 강설 등에 의한 수분이 투수성 포장을 자유롭게 이동할 수 있어 수분손상에 의한 포장체의 변형 및 처짐으로 골재의 박리·박락 현상과 균열 및 포트홀 등으로 포장이 파손되는 경우가 빈번히 발생하고 있다. 한편, 실온에 서 사용이 가능한 메틸메타아크릴수지(MMA: Methyl Methacrylate Reactive Resin)는 낮은 온도(영하 30℃)에서도 작업이 가능하며 염화칼슘 등의 유입에도 손상 없이 견디는 내화학성 및 내염성을 가지고 뛰 어난 접착성을 가지고 있다. MMA 수지의 경우 에폭시 수지 및 우레탄 수지와 같은 액체기와 액체 경화제 로 구성되어 있는 여타 반응성 수지와 달리 상온에서 사용가능한 결합재에 적용할 경우 MMA 수지와 분 말경화제의 배합 및 사용량에 대한 특성을 명확히 적용할 필요가 있다. 본 연구에서는 폐아스콘 순환골재를 전량 활용한 투수성 재생아스팔트 제조를 위한 MMA 수지 상온 재 생아스팔트용 결합재 개발에 앞서 MMA 수지 및 경화제의 종류에 따른 배합의 중합열과 경화속도를 분석 하여 기초자료로 활용하고자 한다. 실험 결과, 단일형 MMA 수지의 경우 경화제의 B.P.O 농도가 높고, 첨가량이 증가할수록 중합열은 증가 하였으며, 경화시간은 단축되는 경향을 보였다. B.P.O 농도 50%의 경우 2%~4%첨가량의 경화시간은 26~40분, 중합열은 82.4℃~94.6℃로 안정적인 중합 반응을 보였으며 5%의 시편에서는 100.4℃의 높은 중 합열이 발생하여 이에 따른 자동가속화반응으로 인한 점도 증가로 기포가 발생하여 공극이 생기는 현상이 발견되었다. B.P.O 농도 40%의 경우 2%~5%첨가량의 경화시간은 23~52분, 중합열은 77.6℃~98.5℃ 안 정적인 중합 반응을 보였다. 하지만 B.P.O 농도 50% 및 40% 모두 첨가량 1%이하에서는 반감기가 길어짐에 따라 단위 시간당 생성되는 자유라디칼의 수가 작아지면서 입자 핵생성 기간이 길어져 반응 초기에 생성된 입자 핵들이 화합하여 성장할 확률과 중합속도 또한 낮아지게 되어 경화시간이 60분 이상 증가하였으며 중 합열 또한 61.5~65.3℃로 낮게 나타났다. 상도형 MMA 수지의 경우 경화시간은 22~30분, 중합열은 59. 1℃~64.2℃로 농도와 첨가량에 의한 차이는 크지 않았으며, 단일형 MMA 수지에 비해 빠른 경화시간과 낮 은 중합열로 안정적인 중합반응을 보였다. 하지만 경화제 4%이상 첨가할 경우에는 농도에 관계없이 중합열 이 감소하여 10℃이상의 차이를 보였으며, 이는 경화제의 첨가량이 증가하면서 분자간의 응집력으로 인하여 균일한 분산이 이루어지지 않아 MMA 수지와 중합반응이 제대로 이루어지지 않은 것으로 판단된다.

Polysilazane and silazane-based precursor films were deposited on stacked TiN/Ti/TEOS/Si-substrate by spin-coating, then annealed at 150~400oC, integrated further to form the top electrode and pad, and finally characterized. Theprecursor solutions were composed of 20% perhydro-polysilazane (SiH2NH)n, and 20% hydropolymethyl silazane(SiHCH3NH)n in dibutyl ether. Annealing of the precursor films led to the compositional change of the two chemicals intosilicon (di)oxides, which was confirmed by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) spectra. It is thought that thedifferent results that were obtained originated from the fact that the two precursors, despite having the same synthetic routeand annealing conditions, had different chemical properties. Electrical measurement indicated that under 0.6MV/cm, a largercapacitance of 2.776×10−11 F and a lower leakage current of 0.4pA were obtained from the polysilazane-based dielectric films,as compared to 9.457×10−12 F and 2.4pA from the silazane-based film, thus producing a higher dielectric constant of 5.48compared to 3.96. FTIR indicated that these superior electrical properties are directly correlated to the amount of Si-O bondsand the improved chemical bonding structures of the spin-on dielectric films, which were derived from a precursor without C.The chemical properties of the precursor films affected both the formation and the electrical properties of the spin-on dielectricfilm.

This study was carried out to evaluate the genotoxicity of the gamma-irradiated (0, 5 and 10 kGy) milk and ice cream. The Salmonella typhimurium reversion assay was performed using S. typhimurium TA98, TA100, TA102, TA1535 and TA1537 as tester strains. The number of revertant colonies were not increased in both milk and ice cream, compared with negative controls with or without metabolic activation. There were no significant differences among the irradiation doses. These results indicate that the gamma-irradiated milk and ice cream do not show any genotoxic effect under these experimental conditions, and that they may be safe genotoxically.

N2처리에 의해 Si (001) 기판에 형성된 C49상의 구조를 갖는 에피택셜 TiSi2상의 열적 거동과 결정학적 특성을 X선 회절법 (XRD)과 고분해능 투과전자현미경법 (HRTEM)으로 조사하였다. 에피택결 C49-TiSi2상은 1000˚C 정도의 고온에서도 안정상인 C54상으로 상변태하지 않고 형태적으로도 고온 특성이 우수하다는 것이 밝혀졌다. HRTEM 결과로부터 에피택결 TiSi2상과 Si 사이의 결정학적 방위관계는 (060) [001]TiSi2//(002) [110]Si임을 알 수 있었고 계면에서의 격자 변형에너지는 misfit 전위의 형성에 의하여 해소되는 것을 확인할 수 있었다. 또한 HRTEM상의 해석과 원자 모델링을 통하여 Si에서 에피택셜 C49-TiSi2상의 형성기구와 C49상의 (020) 면에 존재하는 적층결함을 고찰하였다.

As the interception of communications infringe the close part of the privacy and the degree of the infringement is very serious, the law of protecting the secrecy of communications limits the group of crimes which can be the cause of the interception. As the result, the purpose of the limitation could not be achieved if the materials of evidence would not be restricted to use in investigation and prosecution only for the crimes within the limited group. We could admit the provision §12(1) of the law of protecting the secrecy of communications reasonable, which restrict the scope of the use of the evidence obtained by the interception of the communications. But the indentification materials of electronic communications includes only the names, the telephone numbers of the parties of the communication, the times fo the communication. It does not include the contents of the communications. The degree of the infringement could be said relatively minor and the law does not limit the scope of the crime which could be the cause of the request for the identification materials. Therefore, there would be no reason to limit the scope of the use of the evidence obtained by the request issued by the court. Nevertheless, the provision §13-5 of the law of protecting the secrecy of communications provides that the provision §12(1) which restrict the use of the evidence obtained by the interception apply correspondingly to the indentification materials of electronic communications. From the point of view of legislation, the provision §13-5 could be said inappropriate and should be eliminated in the future.

The relevancy of the seized evidence to the charged crime is a very important issue in that it is connected with the exclusionary rule and there is some risk the evidence could be excluded in trial. Therefore it should be interpreted with sufficient consideration with the various situation in which the investigation is carried, diverse kinds of evidences which are gathered for investigating and prosecuting crime. This relevancy means the evidential value for investigation and prosecution, and the evidential value includes not only the direct but also the indirect and the circumstantial. In this case, it seems that the Supreme Court did not provide sufficient consideration with the various elements of the relevancy, especially the indirect, supplementary, circumstantial value of evidence. Forethemore, it is inappropriate in this case the court of appeal used the issue of relevancy as a tool to restrict the legally obtained evidence relevant to a certain crime from using evidence for other’s crime and the Supreme Court accepted the result. In the future, the discussion which distinguish the issue of relevancy from that of the extent of the utilization of the legally seized evidence should be made actively and lead to the appropriate interpretation.

본 연구에서 사용한 홍삼 전분은 홍삼 농축액 제조 공정에서 발생하는 부산물중 하나로 현재까지는 특별한 활용도가 없었다. 하지만 홍삼 농축액 제조 과정에서 발생되는 홍삼 유래의 물질로 홍삼의 유효 성분인 진세노사이드 및 각종 유리당, 탄수화물 등이 풍부한 안전한 소재로서의 가능성을 알아보고자 하였다. 홍삼전분을 이용한 새로운 홍삼막걸리의 차별화를 위하여 제품의 진세노사이드 함량, 유기산, 유리당, 효모수 등을 분석하였다. 효모 생균수의 변화 조사결과 4℃에서 저장하였을 때는 저장 20일까지 효모 균수에 큰 변화가 없었지만 25℃ 저장에서는 저장 20일에 초기 효모균수의 약 75%가 감소되었다. 유기산분석 결과 막걸리에서는 lactic acid가 4.16 mg/mL의 농도로 가장 많았으며, 그 다음으로는 citric acid 0.88 mg/mL, malic acid 0.39 mg/mL의 순서로 많았다. 저장 초기에는 malic acid의 함량이 4℃ 및 25℃에서 0.39 mg/mL 와 0.58 mg/mL 이었으나 저장일이 20일 경과하였을 때에는 0.46 mg/mL 그리고 0.17 mg/mL으로 측정되었고 대부분의 유기산은 저장기간에 관계없이 변화가 크게 나타나지 않았으나 butyric acid는 증가를 보였다. 20일 경에 lactic acid와 isobutyric acid는 감소하였으며 다른 종류의 유기산은 증가를 보였다. 유리당 분석결과 glucose가 4.4 mg/mL, sucrose 2.8 mg/mL 그리고 mannose 1.4 mg/mL 으로 막걸리의 주 구성당으로 분석되었으며 저장기간이 지속되면서 sucrose, glucose, mannose의 함량은 감소를 보여 알콜 발효의 주요 기질로 사용되었음을 보여주었다. 저장 4~8일 이후부터는 당이 급격히 감소하였으며 8일 이후부터는 큰 차이를 보이지 않았다. 이것은 저장 중 당분이 알콜과 탄산가스로 분해되었기 때문에 함량이 감소한 보여진다. 4℃에서 저장시, 일반적인 유통기간보다(10일) 긴 20일 동안 유리당의 변화를 보였으며 유리당은 12일 경에 sucrose, glucose와 mannose의 양은 1/2으로 감소하였다. 총산 및 pH 분석결과 각 저장온도에서 저장기간에 따른 pH의 변화는, 4℃에서 저장한 경우, 저장 4일경 pH 4.3에서 8일경 pH 3.8로 떨어지면서 저장기간 동안 서서히 감소되었다. 25℃에서 저장한 경우, pH 4.6~3.2 수준으로 4℃ 저장 온도보다 25℃ 온도에서 pH가 낮게 관찰 되었고 진세노사이드 분석결과 함량은 2.47 mg/g으로 측정되었다.

최근 도심지의 노후 된 포장 재정비 및 지하매설물 굴착 복구로 인한 폐아스콘 발생량이 지속적으로 증가하고 있으며, 이러한 건설폐기물 처리의 심각성이 대두됨에 따라 자원순환을 위한 정부의 패러다임 전환 정책이 강화되고 이에 따른 산업인프라 구축이 활발히 진행되고 있다. 한편 폐아스콘 순환골재를 활용한 투수성 재생 아스콘 제조를 통해 탄소배출량 저감, 지하수자원 보존 및 집중호우로 인한 도심지 침수 방지에 효과적일 것으로 예상된다. 따라서 본 연구에서는 투수성 재생아스팔트 혼합물의 제조 및 역학적 특성 규명에 앞서 폐아스콘순환골재의 물리적 특성을 분석하였다. 본 연구에서 사용되는 폐아스콘 순환골재는 G사에서 처리 및 생산된 골재로서 순환골재의 입도 크기별로 25~13mm, 13~8mm 및 8mm 이하의 것으로 분류하여 사용하였다. 25mm이하 폐아스콘 순환골재의 물리적 성질을 KS F 2503 ｢굵은골재의 밀도 및 흡수율 시험｣에 준하여 분석한 결과 밀도 및 흡수율이 각각 2.62 g/cm3, 1.45%로 나타났다. 폐아스콘 순환골재의 품질은 KS F 2572 ｢아스팔트 콘크리트용 순환골재｣에 준하여 실험하였으며, 구재아스팔트 함량 4.43%, 구재아스팔트 침입도(25℃, 1/10mm) 21, 씻기 시험에서 손실되는 양 1.0%, 유기이물질 0.07%, 무기이물질 0.11% 함유하는 것으로 나타나 아스팔트 콘크리트용 순환골재 품질규격에 적합한 것으로 확인되었다. 또한 폐아스콘 순환골재의 체가름시험 결과 골재입도는 25~13mm에서 25mm 100%, 20mm 85%, 13mm 72.5%, 10mm 54.6%, 5.0mm 39.6%, 2.5mm 27.3%, 0.6mm 15.9%, 0.3mm 11.5%, 0.15mm 7.3%, 0.08mm 2.8%, 골재입도 13~8mm에서 25~13mm 100%, 10mm 81.4%, 5.0mm 30.9%, 2.5mm 23.7%, 0.6mm 15.3%, 0.3mm 11.7%, 0.15mm 7.8%, 0.08mm 3.4%, 골재입도 8mm이하에서 25~10mm 100%, 5.0mm 93%, 2.5mm 74.5%, 0.6mm 41.9%, 0.3mm 29.6%, 0.15mm 19.1%, 0.08mm 6.9%의 체통과율이 확인되었으며, 향후 투수성 재생아스콘의 골재로 사용하기 위하여 입도별에 따른 투수성능 및 혼합물의 역학적 특성을 평가하여야 할 것으로 판단된다.

The purpose of this study is to investigate the field application of cold-mixed recycled asphalt using cementless binder. After the test construction, it was not cause problem, such as this stripping, falling and crack of pavement. Also, it was confirmed to be performance of equal or higher than of existing technology.

In 2003, some cases were reported to Attorney General of Korea in Supreme Prosecution Service, in which the suspect in detention rejected the request of the prosecutor to attend at his office. Previously, the Prosecution Service interpreted the request to attend for interrogation of the suspect to have the power to impose the duty on the suspect. But in the Academic circles, the majority viewed the request to have no power to impose the duty. Thus they explained the suspect may refuse to attend and during the interrogation leave the office anytime. The suspects who refused to attend rely on the view of the majority of the literature. The Prosecution Service insisted that the interrogation system of Korean Criminal Procedure give the prosecutor and the judicial police the authority to impose the duty to attend on the suspect, especially the duty to attend and to stay on the suspect in arrest or detention. The duty could be forced by arrest warrant or detention warrant. The provision of detention(§ 69, Korean Criminal Procedure) give the definition that it includes the power to take the suspect to a place and to detain in custody. The power to take to a place should be interpreted to include the power to take the suspect to the investigator’s office during the detention. In this Case of the suspect in detention, the Court approved the view of the Prosecution Service and concluded the judicial police officer who took the suspect to the office for interrogation to be lawful. Notwithstanding, the Court explained the character of the interrogation to be voluntary because the statement of the suspect should not be forced. But it could be said contradictory between the possibility of forcing the duty to attend and stay against the suspect’s will and the character of voluntainess. The compulsory nature could be said to be proper to this system.

In the Prosecution Service Act, it is prescribed that the attending officer of the public attorney has the role of the document officer and the helping agency for the public attorney. As the helping officer, he participate in the interrogation of the public attorney and put questions to the suspect or witness and other persons.As for the questioning of the attending officer, it was judged by the Court in this case that it is allowed, but has limitations. First, the public attorney should in person put questions about the important matters and after it, the attending officer can put questions about details or ambiguous answers. Second, during the question of the attending officer, the public attorney should be present the interrogating place with the attending officer and preside the process. There are some people who insist that the attending officer’s questioning should be prohibited and the public attorney should put all questions in person. But this opinion does not accord with the current law. On enacting the Prosecution service Act, the legislature made the choice with the provision §46 ① 1. that allows the attending officer to do the works relating to the investigation which the public attorney orders. It is thought that this choice would be made because of the insufficient numbers of the public attorney and the necessity of the sharing the burden of works.Considering the overweighting burden of works for the public attorney, the Court’s interpretation could be said to be right to the present. But in practice, if we can say the public attorney’s interrogation, the role of the attending officer should be limited within the supplement of the factual work.

Introducing hearsay rule in 1961, the words of provisions that provide the authentication and attendance of the declarant as exceptions of principle of the court's self-experience, were used as exceptions of the hearsay rule. It results in confusion of the elements of the hearsay rule with the elements of the authentication in the jurisprudence. Many literatures insist and place emphasis on the elements of the authentication as the elements of exceptions of the hearsay rule. With this confusion and misunderstanding, it became very difficult to understand the hearsay rule and many improper interpretations result from this confusion. In the future, the discussion which distinguish the elements of the hearsay rule from the elements of the authentication should be made actively and lead the academy and practice.

In this case, the appeal court says, the fact that the defendant used the privilege against self-incrimination and denied answering the questions of the police in the investigative process could not be used as evidence for evaluating the charge to the disadvantage of the defendant. This reference is appropriate. But the principle that we must not use the fact of no answer as evidence for regarding the assertion of the defendant as unreliable should not be confused as a principle that we must give an advantage to the no answer defendant. No answer could not prohibit the fact finder from infering truth from the indirect circumstantial facts. In this case, the defendant insisted that the drug in his body was not injected by him and he did not know how it was in his body. As two persons known visited him the day of arrest and he saw they put injectors in the waterpot, he thouhgt propably they injected the drug in his body in a stealthy way. But the defendant only insisted this story and did not give any clue with which this story could be checked up and for identifying the two persons. Therefore his assertion should be valued as unreliable because of the unreliability of the assertion itself, not because of the fact of no answer. And as the subjective factors as perception, intention, knowing etc could be infered by indirect factors, in this case, the fact that the defendant injected the drug voluntarily could be presumed from the fact that he was arrested in the intoxication in his room, there was none in his room when he was arrested, injectors were founded in his room. So the fact-finding of the court would be said inappropriate.On the other hand, the appeal court says, when the defendant decided to use the privilege against self-incrimination and not to answer, the police should immediately stop questioning. As in this case the police continued questioning, the interrogation is illegal. But this comment is inappropriate because the current criminal process law recognize the right to question to the public attorney and the police independently to the right of the defendant not to answer. Consequently the police can put questions to the defendant though he uses the privilege. But it is up to the decision of the defendant, whether he refuses all questions from the beginning to the end, or reply partly. As for ruling the interrogation, Korean law is different from the American law. Furthemore, in this case, the questions the police put to the silent defendant were for the name or for affirming whether the defendant would use the privilege or not. Because the questions are not for the fact for the defendant's charge, it would be not illegal with the viewpoint of American law.