• Title/Summary/Keyword: 항공 의무보고

Search Result 114, Processing Time 0.02 seconds

The Significance of Registration Convention and its Future Challenges in Space Law (등록협약의 우주법상 의의와 미래과제에 관한 연구)

  • Kim, Han-Taek
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.35 no.2
    • /
    • pp.375-402
    • /
    • 2020
  • The adoption and entering into force of the Registration Convention was another achievement in expanding and strengthening the corpus iuris spatialis. It was the fourth treaty negotiated by the member states of the UNCOPUOS and it elaborates further Articles 5 and 8 of the Outer Space Treaty(OST). The Registration Convention also complements and strengthens the Article 11 of the OST, which stipulates an obligation of state parties to inform the UN Secretary-General of the nature, conduct, locations, and results of their space activities in order to promote international cooperation. The prevailing purposes of the Registration Convention is the clarification of "jurisdiction and control" as a comprehensive concept mentioned in Article 5 8 of the OST. In addition to its overriding objective, the Registration Convention also contributes to the promotion and the exploration and use of outer space for peaceful purposes. Establishing and maintaining a public register reduces the possibility of the existence of unidentified space objects and thereby lowers the risk such as, for example, putting the weapons of mass destruction secretly into orbit. And furthermore it could serve for a better space traffic management. The Registration Convention is a treaty established to implement Article 5 of OST for the rescue and return of astronaut in more detail. In this respect, if OST is a general law, the Registration Convention would be said to be in a special law. If two laws conflict the principle of lex specialis will be applied. Countries that have not joined the Registration Convention will have to follow the rules concerning the registration of paragraph 7 of the Declaration by the United Nations General Assembly resolution 1721 (X V I) in 1961. UN Resolution 1721 (XVI) is essentially non-binding, but appears to have evolved into the norm of customary international law requiring all States launching space objects into orbit or beyond to promptly provide information about their launchings for registration to the United Nations. However, the nature and scope of the information to be supplied is left to the discretion of the notifying State. The Registration Convention is a treaty created for compulsory registration of space objects by nations, but in reality it is a treaty that does not deviate from existing practice because it is based on voluntary registration. With the situation of dealing with new problems due to the commercialization and privatization of the space market, issues related to the definition of a 'space object', including matter of the registry state of new state that purchased space objects and space debris matter caused by the suspension of space objects launched by the registry state should be considered as matters when amendments, additional protocols or new Registration Convention are established. Also the question of registration of a flight vehicle in the commercial space market using a space vehicle traveling in a sub-orbital in a short time should be considered.

Legal Issues Regarding the Civil Injunction Against the Drone Flight (토지 상공에서의 드론의 비행자유에 대한 제한과 법률적 쟁점)

  • Shin, Hong-Kyun
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.35 no.2
    • /
    • pp.75-111
    • /
    • 2020
  • The civilian drone world has evolved in recent years from one dominated by hobbyists to growing involvement by companies seeking to profit from unmanned flight in everything from infrastructure inspections to drone deliveries that are already subject to regulations. Drone flight under the property right relation with the land owner would be deemed legal on the condition that expeditious and innocent passage of drone flight over the land be assured. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) enshrines the concept of innocent passage through a coastal state's territorial sea. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state. A vessel in innocent passage may traverse the coastal state's territorial sea continuously and expeditiously, not stopping or anchoring except in force majeure situations. However, the disturbances caused by drone flight may be removed, which is defined as infringement against the constitutional interest of personal rights. For example, aggressive infringement against privacy and personal freedom may be committed by drone more easily than ever before, and than other means. The cost-benefit analysis, however, has been recognjzed as effective criteria regarding the removal of disturbances or injunction decision. Applying that analysis, the civil action against such infringement may not find suitable basis for making a good case. Because the removal of such infringement through civil actions may result in only the deletion of journal article. The injunction of drone flight before taking the information would not be obtainable through civil action, Therefore, more detailed and meticulous regulation and criteria in public law domain may be preferable than civil action, at present time. It may be suitable for legal stability and drone industry to set up the detailed public regulations restricting the free flight of drone capable of acquiring visual information amounting to the infrigement against the right of personal information security.

Legal status of Priave Transaction Regarding the Geostationary Satellite Orbit (지구정지궤도의 사적 거래의 국제법상 지위에 관한 연구)

  • Shin, Hong Kyun
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.29 no.2
    • /
    • pp.239-272
    • /
    • 2014
  • The rights and obligations of the Member States of ITU in the domain of international frequency management of the spectrum/orbit resource are incorporated in the Constitution and Convention of the ITU and in the Radio Regulations that complement them. These instruments contain the main principles and lay down the specific regulations governing the major elements such as rights and obligations of member administrations in obtaining access to the spectrum/orbit resource, as well as international recognition of these rights by recording frequency assignments and, as appropriate, any associated orbits, including the geostationary-satellite orbits used or intended to be used in the Master International Frequency Register (MIFR) Coordination is a further step in the process leading up to notification of the frequency assignments for recording in the MIFR. This procedure is a formal regulatory obligation both for an administration seeking to assign a frequency in its network and for an administration whose existing or planned services may be affected by that assignment. Regulatory problem lies in allowing administrations to fulfill their "bringing into use" duty for preserving his filing simply putting any satellites, whatever nationlity or technical specification may be, into filed orbit. This sort of regulatory lack may result in the emergence of the secondary market for satellite orbit. Within satellite orbit secondary market, the object of transaction may be the satellite itself, or the regulatory rights in rem, or the orbit registered in the MIFR. Recent case of selling the Koreasat belongs to the typical example of orbit transaction between private companies, the legality of which remains doubtedly controversial from the perspective of international space law as well as international transaction law. It must be noted, however, that the fact is the Koreasat 3 and its filed orbit is for sale.

Militarization and Weaponization of Outer Space in International Law

  • Kim, Han-Taek
    • The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
    • /
    • v.33 no.1
    • /
    • pp.261-284
    • /
    • 2018
  • The current international legal system does not provide a safeguard against the militarization and the weaponization of outer space. Although the term "peaceful use of outer space" in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty(OST) appears in official government statements or in multilateral space treaties, it is still without an authoritative definition in reviewing national practices. The ambiguous ban on weapons in Article IV of the OST allows countries to loophole on the deployment of other weapons other than nuclear weapons. Meanwhile "Draft Treaty on the Prevention of the Placement of Weapon in Outer Space and of the Threat or Use of Force against Outer Space Objects(PPWT)" to Conference on Disarmament (CD) commissioned by the UN General Assembly's Special Session jointly submitted by China and Russia in 2008 and later revised in 2014, attempting to define and prohibit the proliferation of weapons in outer space and provided definitions of prohibited weapons, are opposed by the US on the grounds that currently there is no arms race in outer space. Some experts support a hard law approach in which binding laws aimed at ultimately creating integrated and binding legal instruments in all aspects of the use of outer space should be adopted to regulate the military use of space. However as a temporary measure the soft law guidelines should be developed for the non liquiet, a situation where there is no applicable law. The soft law could be used to create support for the declaration of the treaties and to create international customary law. For example, the 1963 Declaration of Legal Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space that regulates the activities of the state in the exploration and use of the universe, and the 1992 Principles Relevant to the Use of Nuclear Power Sources in Outer Space will illustrated. While substantial portions of the former was codified later in the 1967 OST, the latter which, although written in somewhat mandatory terms, have been consistently complied with by states, have arguably become part of customary international law. On November 12, 1974, the General Assembly reaffirmed that the development of international law may be reflected inter alia, by declarations and resolutions of the General Assembly which may to that extent be taken into consideration by the International Court of Justice.