The Korean Society of Marine Engineering Regulation of Research Ethics

Enacted on October 8, 2007

Majorly amended on March 18, 2009

Amended on May 4, 2010

Amended on March 5, 2012

Amended on September 9, 2016

Amended on January 10, 2019

Amended on October 15, 2021

Article 1 (Objective)

The purpose of this code of ethics is to establish a set of rules pertinent to research ethics, which are to be complied with by authors, editors, and reviewers in regard to manuscripts published in the Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Engineering (hereinafter referred to as the "Journal") and other publications of the Korean Society of Marine Engineering (hereinafter referred to as the "Society").

Chapter 1 Code of Ethics for Authors

The authors of a manuscript must comply with the code of ethics of the Society in writing and submitting the manuscript, and must verify the accuracy and truthfulness of the research results they submit.

Article 2.1 Plagiarism (Amended May 4, 2010)

1. 1. Authors must not unfairly use the ideas or publications of others that are not common knowledge as if it were the authors’ own without appropriate citation, whether intentionally or not.
2. 2. The following cases may be viewed as plagiarism:
   1. ① The use of other people's central ideas that have already been presented or published, without appropriate citation, even if the language, syntax, or expressions used are different;
   2. ② The use of all or part of a publication by others that has already been presented or published, in direct or indirect forms, without appropriate citation, even if the language used is different;
   3. ③ The use of a central idea from an unpublished work of others, such as research plans, proposals, or lecture materials, in direct or indirect forms, without appropriate citation, even if the language used is different;
   4. ④ Direct use of excerpts from others’ manuscripts of more than two consecutive sentences, without appropriate citation.
3. 3. The following cases may not be viewed as plagiarism:
   1. ① The use of expressions or ideas of others, whose uniqueness is not recognized;
   2. ② A compilation of academic papers with citations, whose uniqueness is recognized in the selection or arrangement of the subject matter, even if multiple publications of others are included;
   3. ③ The use of research results of others that have already been presented and are accepted as common knowledge following their publication in textbooks or publicly available data files, without citation;
   4. ④ The evaluation of experts of the same or other related fields that the work does not plagiarize others.

Article 2.2 Fabrication and Falsification (Adopted May 4, 2010)

1. 1. Authors must not intentionally exaggerate or understate a part of the research data in order to reach an untruthful conclusion for the sake of personal benefit at the expense of academic integrity.
2. 2. Authors must not intentionally misrepresent the research results for the sake of personal benefit, even if the research data is accurate.

Article 3 (Recognition of Publication)

1. 1. Authors should be recognized as the authors only for the research to which they have contributed or that they have performed, or that has been recognized as their achievement.
2. 2. The order of authors or translators in academic papers or other publications must reflect the extent of contribution to the research, regardless of their relative status. Listing as an author or recognition as lead author cannot be justified solely because of one's position. Conversely, failure to be listed as a co-author (translator) or a co-researcher, despite contributing to the research or writing (translation) cannot be justified. Minor contributions to the research or writing (translation) should be appropriately marked in the footnotes, introduction, or acknowledgement.

Article 3.1 (Participation of Minors and Special-Interested People in the Research)

1. 1. In the case of having a relative, the spouse of the research manager, the lineal ascendant, descendant, and the fourth cousin of himself/herself or his/her spouse, (hereinafter referred to as a "special interested person") or a minor (age 19 or younger) participate in the research, Prior-Notice of Participation of Special-Interested People (Appendix No. 1), Pledge to comply with the research ethics for Minors (Appendix No. 2), and Consent for Personal information provision and utilization (Appendix No. 3) must be prepared and submitted to the editor-in-chief for approval. < Adopted October 15, 2021>

Article 4 Duplicate or Multiple Publication of Research Results (Amended March 5, 2012)

1. 1. Authors must not redundantly submit or publish part or all of an academic paper or publication that has already been submitted or published in the same or other languages, without accurate indication of citation and quotation. This also applies to cases where the overall content of the paper or publication is essentially the same, even if some parts of the research data or language differ.
2. 2. Regardless of the provisions of Section 1, authors may submit or publish work that corresponds to the cases described in any of the following clauses. However, the authors, as a rule, must accurately indicate the citation and quotation in the cases described by Clauses 1 to 6. Exceptions may be made, depending on the characteristics of the material submitted and relevant academic opinion.
   1. ① Submission or publication of all or part of a thesis or dissertation as a separate academic paper or a book;
   2. ② Submission or publication of all or part of a research project report as a separate academic paper or book;
   3. ③ Publication of a compilation of academic papers that have already been published;
   4. ④ Submission or publication of an identical whole or part of an academic paper or a book in the same or other languages, with the agreement of the relevant copyright owner;
   5. ⑤ Submission or publication of a longer paper that precedes a short prefatory paper (such as a letter, or a brief communication), or a paper that supplements such a prefatory paper with additional research data, analysis or detailed information on the research procedure;
   6. ⑥ Publication of all or part of an already published academic paper or book in the form of an anthology or in the special edition of a journal, following selection and editing by other editors and authors, with the agreement of the original authors;
   7. ⑦ Publication of a simpler description of an already published academic paper or book in non-academic media such as informative books and popular magazines.
   8. ⑧ Other publications that have equivalent validity to the above clauses and which do not violate academic integrity.
3. 3. Registration of an already published research result as an intellectual property is allowed regardless of the provisions of Sections 1 and 2.

Article 5 (Indication of Citations and References)

1. 1. When publicly available academic materials are to be cited, authors must ensure the accurate description of such materials, and their source must be indicated if the materials are not of common knowledge. Materials obtained from the evaluation of an academic paper or a research proposal, or from personal contacts, may be cited only with the agreement of the researchers who provided the materials.
2. 2. When the writings of others are cited, or when an idea is borrowed or referred to, the citation or reference must be indicated in a footnote or headnote. The authors must ensure the readers understand which part corresponds to the results from previous works, and which part is unique and is a claim or interpretation by the authors.
3. 3. “Author” refers to a person who has made substantial intellectual contributions to a published paper. Accordingly, all co-authors of the paper shall list each of his/her participatory roles after the postscript of the paper. (amended 2019. 1. 10)

Article 6 (Conflicts of Interest)

All authors must recognize and declare the possibility of financial and personal conflicts of interest with others or organizations that may have an inappropriate effect on their research results and interpretations. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultation, paid advisory services, stock ownership, paid expert testimony, royalties, patent applications/registration, government subsidies or other funds and etc. (amended 2019. 1. 10)

Article 7 (Revision of Manuscripts)

Authors must endeavor to reflect the comments from editors and reviewers provided during the peer-review process of the manuscript as much as possible. If the authors disagree with the comments, they must notify the editor (or the editorial board) with a detailed description of the basis and the reason.

Chapter 2 Code of Ethics for Editors

Editors, in collaboration with other editors, must comply with the following code of ethics while reviewing and assessing submitted manuscripts:

Article 8 (Responsibility of the Editors)

Editors take full responsibility for the decision whether a submitted manuscript is to be published. Editors must respect the personality of the authors and their independence as academics.

Article 9 (Treatment of Manuscripts)

Editors must treat all manuscripts submitted for publication in the Journal fairly, based solely on the level of quality of the manuscript and the submission guidelines, irrespective of not only the gender, age, or authors' institutional affiliations, but also without any influence from prejudices or personal acquaintanceship.

Article 10 (Request for Review)

Editors must request a review of the manuscript submitted for publication in the Journal from a reviewer with expertise in the relevant field who is capable of conducting a fair evaluation. In requesting a review, editors must endeavor to avoid reviewers excessively acquainted with or hostile to the author, so that the review is as objective as possible. However, if the authors dispute the decision, the editor may consult a third-party expert from the relevant field.

Article 11 (Confidentiality)

Editors must not disclose authors' details or the contents of a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the reviewer until a decision has been taken regarding publication of the manuscript.

Chapter 3 Code of Ethics for Reviewers

Reviewers must provide advice to editors regarding publication by reviewing the submitted manuscripts in accordance with the following code of ethics:

Article 12 (Review)

Reviewers must faithfully review the manuscripts as requested by the editors (or the editorial board) of the Journal, within the period set out by the reviewer’s guidelines and must notify the editors (or the editorial board) of the results. Reviewers must notify the editors (or the editorial board) immediately if they believe they are not suitable to evaluate the content of the manuscript.

Article 13 (Principles of Reviewing)

Reviewers must evaluate the manuscripts fairly and objectively, regardless of personal academic beliefs or acquaintanceship with the authors. Reviewers must not reject a manuscript without providing sufficient reason or because the manuscript is in conflict with the reviewers’ own perspectives or interpretations. Moreover, reviewers must not evaluate the manuscripts without thorough reading.

Article 14 (Description of the Review Results)

Reviewers must respect the personality and independence of the authors as professional intellectuals. In the review opinion letter, reviewers must express their judgment of the manuscript. With regard to the aspects that require improvement, the reasons must be explained in detail. Reviewers must use expressions that are as polite and gentle as possible and avoid expressions that would deprecate or insult the authors.

Article 15 (Confidentiality)

Reviewers must keep the manuscripts to be reviewed confidential. Except in the particular case of asking for advice on the evaluation of a manuscript, it is inappropriate for reviewers to show manuscripts to or discuss the contents of manuscripts with others. Furthermore, reviewers must not cite the content of manuscripts without the agreement of the authors prior to their publication in the Journal.

Chapter 4 Research Ethics Committee and Miscellaneous

Article 16 (Research Ethics Committee) (Adopted March 18, 2009)

The Society shall operate a committee for the establishment of research ethics, prevention of unethical research conduct, and fair and systematic verification of veracity when unethical research conduct occurs. The details pertinent to the establishment and operation of this committee shall be governed by separate regulations.

Article 17 (Pledge to the Code of Research Ethics)

New members must pledge to comply with the present code of research ethics. Existing members are regarded as having pledged to the code of research ethics upon its enactment.

Article 18 (Procedures for Suspected Unethical Research Conduct Prior to Publication)

If an editor or reviewer raises a suspicion of unethical research conduct regarding a manuscript to the director of the editorial board during the review process, a comprehensive investigation shall be carried out and determined by the research ethics committee.

Article 19 (Voluntary Withdrawal of Published Paper) (adopted on September 28, 2016):

In case the author requests a withdrawal of the paper published in the journal due to some inevitable circumstances, the following measures shall be taken.

1. 1. When all authors agree to withdraw because they found serious defects in the published paper during the follow-up study of the published paper, or there is a disagreement about the published paper among the co-authors (although the published paper is not related to plagiarism or duplicate publication) and they request a withdrawal by notifying this to the Society, the paper can be withdrawn, after all authors of the paper are notified on this in writing, a letter of explanation from the authors has been submitted, and then the Research Ethics Committee has made the final decision.
2. 2. To withdraw the paper, the relevant institution shall be notified, and the published paper shall be withdrawn. Furthermore, the Society shall cancel all authors’ papers currently pending review and publication, and all applicable authors shall not be able to submit a paper to the Society for a year.

Article 20 (Procedure for Plagiarism and Duplicate Publications)

If a paper published in the journal is found to be plagiarism or re-published after published previously in another journal, the following measures shall be taken in accordance with the severity of the misconduct:

1. ① (Warning) If the contents of the publicated paper correspond to more than 20 % to 35 % of the misconduct from another existing published paper, all authors of the publicated paper shall be notified in an official document, submit a written explanation to the Society, and the Research Ethics Committee shall make a final decision and warn them to be careful when writing a future paper.
2. ② (Reprimand) If the contents of the publicated paper correspond to more than 35 % to 50 % of the misconduct from another existing published paper, all authors of the publicated paper shall be notified in an official document, the publicated paper shall be withdrawn, and the Society shall post this fact on the bulletin board of the Society for one month. In addition, all papers currently under review and all pending papers for publication by the Society submitted by the authors of the misconduct shall be cancelled. And all authors of the paper are not allowed to submit their papers to the Society for the next one year.
3. ③ (Serious Reprimand) If the contents of the publicated paper correspond to more than 50% of the misconduct from another existing published paper, the heads of all authors' affiliations and the authors shall be notified in official documents, and also the president of the related association that published the original paper that is plagiarized shall be notified. And the publicated paper shall be withdrawn and this fact shall be posted on the website of the Society for three months. In addition, all papers currently under review and pending papers for publication by the Society submitted by the authors of the misconduct shall be cancelled. The Korea Research Foundation shall be notified of the details and all the authors of the paper are not allowed to submit their papers to the Society for the next three years.
4. ④ After the above measure, the president of the Society shall send an official letter of apology to the authors of the original paper that is plagiarized.

Article 21 (Amendment of the Code of Ethics)

The procedures for the amendment of the code of ethics shall be governed by the provisions of the Society Articles of incorporation (Article 27, Function of the Board of Chairs). Upon amendment of the code of ethics, the members who pledged to comply with the previous code of ethics are regarded as having pledged to the new code, without an additional pledge.

Article 22 (Notification of the Code of Ethics)

In order to promote members' awareness of research ethics, the code of research ethics and guidelines shall be notified to all members via email, on the first week of every even month.

Addendum

• The present code of ethics takes effect on October 8, 2007.
• The present amendment of the code of ethics is effective from March 18, 2009.
• The present amendment of the code of ethics is effective from May 4, 2010.
• The present amendment of the code of ethics is effective from March 5, 2012.
• The present amendment of the code of ethics is effective from September 28, 2016.
• The present amendment of the code of ethics is effective from January 10, 2019.

The Korean Society of Marine Engineering Detailed Regulations for Enforcement of Regulation of Research Ethics

Enacted on October 8, 2007

Majorly amended on March 18, 2009

Amended on May 4, 2010

Amended on March 5, 2012

Chapter 1 General Provisions

Article 1 (Objective)

The purpose of the present regulations is to regulate the establishment and operation of the Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Committee”), as initiated in Article 15 of the Korean Society of Marine Engineering Code of Research Ethics.

Article 2 (Scope)

The present regulation applies to all members who are directly or indirectly related to the research and development activities of the Korean Society of Marine Engineering (hereinafter referred to as the "Society"), such as the publication of manuscripts submitted to the Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Engineering (hereinafter referred to as the “Journal”), and the presentation of the results of research performed by the Society at the request of external research projects.

Article 3 (Definition of Terms)

1. 1. Unethical research conduct (hereinafter referred to as “Unethical Conduct”) refers to falsification, fabrication, plagiarism, duplicate publication, and unfair listing of authors during the proposal and practice of research, and during the reporting and presentation of the results, which are specified by the following clauses. However, those instances attributable to mistakes, insignificant errors, or differences of opinion are excluded.
   1. ① Fabrication: False creation of non-existent data or research results;
   2. ② Falsification: Distortion of research content or results, through intentional manipulation of the materials, apparatus or process of the research, or through deliberate modification or omission of the data or research results;
   3. ③ Plagiarism: The use of ideas, research content, or results of others without appropriate approval or citation;
   4. ④ Duplicate publication: The use of already published research results of the authors' own in other academic journals or publications, without appropriate approval or citation (as adopted May 4, 2010);
   5. ⑤ Unfair listing of authors: Repudiation of the authorship of a person who made scientific or technical contribution to the research content or results, without valid reasons, or the attribution of authorship to a person who did not make scientific or technical contribution, for reasons such as appreciation or politeness;
   6. ⑥ Intentional disruption of an investigation into Unethical Conduct by oneself or others, or threatening informants;
   7. ⑦ Suggesting to, forcing, or threatening others to perform the above forms of Unethical Conduct;
   8. ⑧ Other behavior that gravely deviates from the range commonly accepted by the scientific and technological communities.
2. 2. “Informant” refers to a person who has notified the Society or research foundations of an event deemed to be Unethical Conduct, or relevant evidence thereof.
3. 3. “Respondent” refers to a person who is under investigation for Unethical Conduct following a report from an informant or the perception of a research institute, or a person who is under investigation due to suspicion of association with the Unethical Conduct during the process of investigation, excluding witnesses and referees.
4. 4. “Preliminary investigation” refers to the process of deciding the necessity of formal investigation of suspected Unethical Conduct.
5. 5. “Formal investigation” refers to the official investigation and evaluation of all relevant facts to decide whether the suspected Unethical Conduct has in fact been performed, to decide the responsible person, the extent of the gravity of the Unethical Conduct, and the type of Unethical Conduct.
6. 6. “Decision” refers to the confirmation of the investigation results and notification of these results to informants and respondents in a documented form.

Chapter 2 Function and Organization of the Research Ethics Committee (Amended March 5, 2012)

Article 4 (Functions)

The Committee shall deliberate and decide on the matters concerning the following clauses:

1. 1. Establishment and operation of the policies pertinent to research ethics and veracity;
2. 2. Nomination of the committee for the receipt and administration of reports of Unethical Conduct;
3. 3. Initiation of preliminary and formal investigations, and approval of investigation results;
4. 4. Protection of informants, and the restoration of the reputation of respondents;
5. 5. Administration of the results of the verification of research veracity, and subsequent actions;
6. 6. Other tasks designated by the chair.

Article 5 (Organization)

1. 1. The Research Ethics Committee (hereinafter referred to as the “Committee”) shall consist of nine members, including three exclusive members, who are the chair of the Society, the vice-president in charge of editorial board, and the Editor-in-Chief. The chair of the Committee shall be the chair of the Society, and the vice-chair of the Committee shall be nominated from within the Committee (as amended March 5, 2012).
2. 2. The members other than the above ex-officio members shall be nominated by the chair of the Committee with the recommendation of the board of directors of the Society. The tenure shall be one year.
3. 3. A person with affiliations to issues under investigation during the year must not be included on the Committee (as amended March 5, 2012).
4. 4. Removed (as amended March 5, 2012)

Article 6 (Tasks of the Chair of the Committee and Others)

1. 1. The chair of the Committee shall represent the Committee and preside over meetings.
2. 2. The vice-chair shall assist the chair, and execute the tasks of the chair as proxy if the chair cannot perform the tasks due to unavoidable circumstances.
3. 3. In order to promote the smooth operation of the Committee, the director of the editorial board of the Journal shall be appointed as the secretary of the Committee.

Article 7 (Meetings)

1. 1. The chair of the Committee shall convene meetings and preside over the meetings as moderator.
2. 2. The meetings shall issue decisions, with the presence of more than half of the nominated members, and upon the agreement of more than two-thirds of the members present.
3. 3. While meetings shall be kept private in principle, those who are not members of the committee may be invited to provide opinions if necessary.

Chapter 3 Verification of Research Veracity

Article 8 (Reports of Unethical Conduct and their Treatment)

1. 1. Informants may make reports to the Society via any means possible, including oral communication, letter, and email, and must generally reveal their identity. However, if informants wish to remain anonymous, they must provide the name of the research project or the paper, and specific details and evidence of the Unethical Conduct via letter or email.
2. 2. Informants who make reports despite being aware of, or having the capability to be aware of, the falsity of the report shall not be considered for protection.
3. 3. The Committee may take substantial actions to prevent the loss, damage, concealment, or falsification of evidence or research records for the sake of preservation of evidence.

Article 9 (Preliminary Investigation Committee)

1. ① The chair of the Committee must organize a preliminary investigation committee, consisting of no more than three members, within ten days of the initial receipt of the report.

Article 10 (Duration and Methods of Preliminary Investigation)

1. 1. The preliminary investigation must be initiated within fifteen days of the initial receipt of the report, and the commencement of a formal investigation must be decided upon within thirty days of the initiation of the preliminary investigation.
2. 2. The following shall be reviewed during the preliminary investigation:
   1. ① Conformity of the report to Unethical Conduct as set out in Article 4 Section 1;
   2. ② The necessity for and appropriateness of a concrete and specific formal investigation of the report;
   3. ③ Whether the date of the report is five years over the date of validity.

Article 11 (Report of Preliminary Investigation Results)

1. 1. Preliminary investigation results must be notified to the institution that financially supports the manuscript and the research and informants in a documented form within ten days of the Committee's approval. However, this does not apply if informants remain anonymous.
2. 2. The preliminary investigation report must include the content described by each of the following clauses:
   1. ① A specific detailed report of the Unethical Conduct and the identity of the informant;
   2. ② The suspected Unethical Conduct under investigation and the related research tasks;
   3. ③ Decision on the initiation of a formal investigation, and the basis for the decision;
   4. ④ Other relevant evidence.

Article 12 (Duration and Methods of Formal Investigation)

1. 1. A formal investigation must be initiated within thirty days of the approval of the preliminary investigation results by the Committee, during which period a committee for the formal investigation (hereinafter referred to as the “Investigation Committee”) must be organized.
2. 2. The formal investigation must be completed within ninety days of initiation, including the issue of decision.
3. 3. If the Investigation Committee deems it impossible to complete the investigation within the period as set out in Section 2, the Investigation Committee must explain the reason to the Committee and request an extension of the investigation period.

Article 13 (Organization of the Investigation Committee)

1. 1. The Investigation Committee shall consist of more than seven members, and the chair of the Investigation Committee shall be nominated from within the members of the Investigation Committee.
2. 2. The members of the Investigation Committee shall be appointed by the chair of the Society, on the recommendation of the Committee.
3. 3. The Investigation Committee must include more than three members who have expert knowledge and wide experience in the relevant field and external personnel with expertise and objectivity may also be appointed.
4. 4. A person with affiliations to the issue under investigation must not be included in the Investigation Committee.

Article 14 (Exclusion and Recusance)

1. 1. Upon suitable explanation, respondents or informants may request the exclusion of a member of the Investigation Committee if they believe a fair decision cannot be expected.
2. 2. Members of the Investigation Committee must be recused from the issue under investigation if they have direct affiliations to the issue.
3. 3. Members of the Investigation Committee may recuse themselves for reasons similar to the provisions of Section 1 or Section 2, with the approval of the chair of the Investigation Committee.

Article 15 (Request of Presence and Presentation of Evidence)

1. 1. The Investigation Committee may request the presence of informants, respondents, witnesses or referees to present a statement. In such cases, respondents must comply with the request.
2. 2. The Investigation Committee may request the presentation of evidence by respondents and may enforce the prohibition of entrance to the relevant laboratory by respondents or confiscation and custody of relevant research materials, upon the approval of the heads of the relevant institutions.

Article 16 (Protection of the Rights of Informants and Respondents and Maintenance of Confidentiality)

1. 1. In all cases, the identity of informants must not be revealed, directly or indirectly. The names of informants must not be included in the investigation report for the sake of the protection of informants, unless absolutely necessary.
2. 2. If informants suffer from penalties, discrimination, unfair pressure, or threats, such as disciplinary action, in the workplace as a result of their actions, measures must be taken to undo any harm suffered by the informants or to respond to the informants' needs.
3. 3. Care must be exercised to avoid violation of the reputations or rights of respondents until completion of the verification regarding the Unethical Conduct. Efforts must be made to restore the reputation of respondents found innocent of Unethical Conduct.
4. 4. All information regarding reports, investigations, examinations, decisions, and suggestions must be kept confidential. Those directly or indirectly related to the investigations, or those related to the heads of the relevant institutions, must not disclose any information acquired during the process of the investigation or the completion of assigned tasks. However, if there is a valid necessity for disclosure of information, it may be disclosed, subject to the decision of the Committee.

Article 17 (Assurance of the Rights of Dispute and Appeal)

The Investigation Committee must assure equal rights and opportunities to state an opinion, dispute, and appeal, to both informants and respondents, and mustensure both parties are informed of the relevant procedures.

Article 18 (Protection of the Rights of Informants and Respondents and Maintenance of Confidentiality)

1. 1. The Investigation Committee must submit a formal investigation report (hereinafter referred to as the “Final Report”) to the Committee within ten days of the completion of the formal investigation.
2. 2. The Final Report must include the content described by each of the following clauses:
   1. ① Care must be exercised to avoid violation of the reputations or rights of respondents until completion of the verification regarding the Unethical Conduct. Efforts must be made to restore the reputation of respondents found innocent of Unethical Conduct.
   2. ② All information regarding reports, investigations, examinations, decisions, and suggestions must be kept confidential. Those directly or indirectly related to the investigations, or those related to the heads of the relevant institutions, must not disclose any information acquired during the process of the investigation or the completion of assigned tasks. However, if there is a valid necessity for disclosure of information, it may be disclosed, subject to the decision of the Committee.
   3. ③ The role of the respondent, and the veracity of the suspicion of Unethical Conduct;
   4. ④ Relevant evidence and witnesses;
   5. ⑤ Disputing and appeals against the investigation results by the informant or respondent, and the corresponding actions;
   6. ⑥ The list of members of the Investigation Committee.

Article 19 (Decision)

1. 1. The Investigation Committee shall confirm the details and findings of the investigation as shown in Final Report after approval from the Committee, and must immediately notify the details and findings to informants and respondents.
2. 2. If the Investigation Committee does not reach an agreement with regards to the details and findings of the investigation, the Investigation Committee may issue a decision through voting, in which case the decision shall be made with the presence of more than half of the members and upon the agreement of more than two-thirds of the members present.

Article 20 (Reports to Research Foundations and Others)

1. 1. The Final Report must be submitted to the institution that supported the relevant research within ten days of the decision, and materials pertinent to the investigation may be submitted, upon the request from superior authorities.
2. 2. In addition to the provisions of Section 1, the following must be reported to the relevant research foundation immediately, even during the investigation:
   1. ① Violation of legal statutes, or relevant regulations;
   2. ② Serious threats, or the clear possibility thereof, to public welfare and safety;
   3. ③ Other cases where action by research foundations or public authorities are required.

Chapter 4 Actions after Verification

Article 21 (Actions Regarding the Findings)

1. 1. The chair of the Society shall notify the actions regarding the findings to respondents in a documented form.
2. 2. The details pertinent to the disciplinary actions shall be governed by the provisions of the Code of Ethics.

Article 22 (Preservation and Disclosure of Records)

1. 1. The records related to preliminary or formal investigations shall be preserved by the Society, and the duration of preservation shall be five years from the completion of each investigation.
2. 2. While investigation reports may be disclosed after the decision, information pertinent to the identity of informants, members of the Investigation Committee, witnesses, referees, or advisors, may not be disclosed if the disclosure is likely to be to the detriment of the relevant person.

Article 23 (Reconsideration)

1. 1. If a respondent or informant disagrees with a decision of the Investigation Committee, the respondent or informant may request the Investigation Committee to reconsider within thirty days of the notification of the results, in a documented form that describes the reasons.
2. 2. The Investigation Committee must decide on the initiation of reconsideration within fifteen days of the request for reconsideration.
3. 3. Other procedures and methods for reconsideration are additionally established by the Investigation Committee.

Addendum

• The present regulations take effect from October 8, 2007.
• The present major amendment of the regulations takes effect from March 18, 2009.
• The present amendment of the regulations takes effect from May 4, 2010.
• The present amendment of the regulations takes effect from March 5, 2012.