• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2003.11a
• /
• pp.35-44
• /
• 2003

Considering possible legal and policy problems with regard to the Cheju Strait, a central issue is whether the Cheju Strait should be treated as Korean territorial sea or an international strait The claim that the strait is territorial sea has been based on the use of a straight baseline method of dermarcation With the use of straight baseline, Korea claims that the breadth of the Cheju Strait is only 20.7 miles at its narrowest point and therefore the strait becomes the territorial sea of Korea. The consideration cf marine pollution has weighed heavily in claiming the Cheju Strait as territorial sea. Pollution resulting from the accidents cf tankers caused by fire, collision, or stranding in the Cheju Strait and the Korea Strait would be enormous, affecting the entire coastal waters of the south coasts cf Korea's mainland and Japan's Tsushima Islands areas. Catastrophic pollution in the Cheju Strait could also come from the accidents cf large-size oil tankers passing through the Korea Strait from the Malacca Strait Although the Korean government considers the geographic and socioeconomic conditions sufficient to justify Korea's claim of the Cheju Strait as territorial sea, it believes that declaring it so would raise considerable legal conflicts with maritime states. In view of the legal difficulties and the need to meet the problems arising from the growing vessel traffic in the Cheju Strait, the sea lanes and traffic separation schemes may be considered an alternative to the internationalization of the Cheju Strait Even if the Korean government dose not do so, the regime of innocent passage should be applied to vessels passing through the Strait and should not suspend innocent passage through the Strait. Therefore, the Korean government needs to have a more legal, pragmatic, functional and managerial approach than a purely sovereign and selfish approach to the solution of legal matters of the Cheju strait For this purpose, the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea would serve as a guide and also self-restraint and cooperative approaches would become norms governing the resolution of the law of the sea issues in the Cheju Strait.

• Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety
• /
• v.14 no.2
• /
• pp.149-156
• /
• 2008

The right of hot pursuit is an exception to the general rule that a ship on the high seas is subject to the jurisdiction of the state whose flag she flies. The right of hot pursuit is provided in the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. This paper discusses the requirements for the right of hot pursuit. The use of force should be avoided during hot pursuit. When force is unavoidable, it should not be used beyond what is reasomable and necessary in the circumstances.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.83-109
• /
• 2008

According to 1944 Chicago Convention aircraft are classified into public aircraft(or state aircraft) and private aircraft(or civil aircraft). However even if public aircraft owned by government are used as commercial flights, those are classified into private aircraft. But as far as space activities are concerned in the 1967 Outer Space Treaty, those are related to all activities and all space objects, thus there being no differentiation between the public spacecraft and private spacecraft. As for the institutions of air law there are ICAO, IATA, ECAC, AFCAC, ACAC, LACAC in the world. However in the field of space law there is no International Civil Space Organization like ICAO. There is only COPUOS in the United Nations. The particular institutions such as INTELSAT, INMARSAT, ITU, WIPO, ESA, ARABSAT would be helpful to space law field. In the near future there is a need to establish International Civil Space Organization to cover problems rising from all space activities. According to article 1 of the 1944 Chicago Convention the contracting States recognize that every State has complete and exclusive sovereignty over the airspace above its territory. It means that absolute airspace sovereignty is recognized by not only the treaty law and but also customary law which regulates non-contracting States to the treaty. However as for the space law in the article n of the 1967 Space Treaty outer space, including the moon and other celestial bodies, is not subject to national appropriation by claim of sovereignty, by means of use or occupation, or by any other means. It creates res extra commercium like the legal status of high seas in the law of the sea. However the 1979 Moon Agreement proclaimed Common Heritage of Mankind as far as the legal status of the outer space is concerned which is like the legal status of deep sea-bed in the 1982 United Nations Law of the Sea. As far as the liabilities of air transport system are concerned there are two kinds. One is the liabilities to passenger on board aircraft and the other is the liabilities to the third person or thing on the ground by the aircraft. The former is regulated by the Warsaw System, the latter by the Rome Convention. As for the liabilities of space law the 1972 Liability Convention applies. The Rome Convention and 1972 Liability Convention stipulate absolute liability. In the field of space transportation there would be new liability system to regulate the space passengers on board spacecraft like Warsaw System in the air transportation.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.2 no.1
• /
• pp.125-149
• /
• 2021

Even 10 years after the Fukushima nuclear disaster, Japan has yet to solve the problems emerging from generating contaminated water every day. Japan has unilaterally decided to release nuclear wastewater in the sea despite Korea's concerns about safety as their radioactive water storage tanks reach the limits. Despite Korea's response, Japan is still preparing to discharge nuclear wastewater without fulfilling its obligations under the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. There are concerns about marine pollution caused by the radioactive materials from nuclear wastewater and invading Korea's maritime sovereignty. In particular, it is impossible to reverse the effects of environmental pollution, so plans to discharge radioactive water must be prevented unless immediate safety is guaranteed. This study proposes Korea's response strategy to resolve the conflict between the two countries due to plans to release contaminated water. Korea should respond to Japan's release of nuclear wastewater in the sea in various ways through cooperation with Japan, provisional measures, and cooperation with neighboring countries.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.26 no.1
• /
• pp.3-30
• /
• 2011

According to the Article 86 of the United Nations on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS) the provisions of high seas apply to all parts of the sea that are not included in the exclusive economic zone, in the territorial sea or in the internal waters of a State, or in the archipelagic waters of an archipelagic State. Article 87 also stipulates the freedom of the high seas. International laws on the flight over the high seas are found as follows; Firstly, as far as the nationality of the aircraft is concerned, its legal status is quite different from the ship where the flags of convenience can be applied practically. There is no flags of convenience of the aircraft. Secondly, according to the Article 95 of UNCLOS warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. We can suppose that the military(or state) aircraft over the high seas have also complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. Thirdly, according to the Article 101 of UNCLOS piracy consists of any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft. We can conclude that piracy can de done by a pirate aircraft as well as a pirate ship. Fourthly, according to the Article 111 (5) of UNCLOS the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. We can conclude that the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only military aircraft, or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. Fifthly, according to the Article 110 of UNCLOS a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that: (a) the ship is engaged in piracy, (b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade, (c) the ship is engaged in an authorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109, (d) the ship is without nationality, or (e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft. Sixthly, according to the Article 1 (5)(dumping), 212(pollution from or through the atmosphere), 222(enforcement with respect to pollution from or through the atmosphere) of UNCLOS aircraft as well as ship is very much related to marine pollution. Seventhly, as far as the crime on board aircraft over the high seas is concerned 1963 Convention on the Offences and Certain Other Acts Committed on Board Aircraft(Tokyo Convention) will be applied, and as for the hijacking over the high seas 1970 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Seizure of Aircraft(Hague Convention) and as for the sabotage over the high seas 1971 Convention for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts Against the Safety of Civil Aviation(Montreal Convention) will be applied respectively. These three conventions recognize the flag state jurisdiction over the crimes on board aircraft over the high seas. Eightly, as far as reconnaissance by foreign aircraft in the high seas toward the coastal States is concerned it is not illegal in terms of international law because its act is done in the high seas. Ninthly as for Air Defence Identification Zone(ADIZ) there are no articles dealing with it in the 1944 Chicago Convention. The legal status of the foreign aircraft over this sea zone might be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states whether this zone is legitimate or illegal. Lastly, the Arctic Sea is the frozen ocean. So the flight over that ocean is the same over the high seas. Because of the climate change the Arctic Sea is getting melted. If the coastal states of the Arctic Sea will proclaim the Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) as the ocean is getting melted, the freedom of flight over that ocean will also be restricted to the regulations of the coastal states.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.146-167
• /
• 2001

Korea and China are two opposite countries located aside Yellow Sea and co-utilize the East China Sea. The two countries are close together from geological point of view, however, the competitive development of resources was more emphasized than the cooperative development of resources between the two countries because the special policy relationship. Additionally, after the communist government of China was founded in 1949, the political conception between the two countries was quite different. Therefore the establishment of appropriate international fisheries co-operation was impossible, and the international management problems of fisheries resources in Yellow Sea and East China Sea were let alone. UN convention on the Law of the Sea came to force in 1994, Korea and China adopted the exclusive economic zone system in 1996. On the other hand, Fisheries Law in Korea was enacted in 1953 in order to management of fisheries resources, and also China was enacted fisheries law in 1986. The two countries control the fisheries effort through fisheries license system, meanwhile through prohibition fishing area, prohibition fishing period, limitation of net size, and limitation of body length to conserve and manage the fisheries resource. The serious management methods of resource management in the two countries are similar such as the creation of promptly decreased species and those species that have commercial value, discharge of fish seedling stock, settlement of artificial reef and clean of fishing ground. Therefore, the two countries should consider not only the improvement of formal law system, but also how to recover the fisheries resources in circumference water zone and how to improve the efficiency of fisheries resource management. Specially the settlement and management of artificial reef should be chosen in the area that have the highest benefit to two countries, and should establish the common management system of discharge of fish seedling stock. And the two countries should adopt the same criteria through technical management and limitation of net size, limitation of body length, and prohibition area of special fisheries to ensure the highest fisheries benefit of fisherman in the two countries and the highest efficiency of fisheries resource management.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.201-224
• /
• 2017

The main subject of this article focused on the legal status of the military aircraft in the high seas. For this the legal status of the military aircraft, the freedom of overflight, the right of hot pursuit, the right of visit and Air Defense Identification Zone (ADIZ) were dealt. The 1944 Chicago Convention neither explicitly nor implicitly negated the customary norms affecting the legal status of military aircraft as initially codified within the 1919 Paris Convention. So the status of military aircraft was not redefined with the Chicago Convention and remains, as stated in the 1919 Paris Convention, as a norm of customary international law. The analyses on the legal status of the military aircraft in the high seas are found as follows; According to the Article 95 of the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) warships on the high seas have complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. We can suppose that the military aircraft in the high seas have also complete immunity from the jurisdiction of any State other than the flag State. According to the Article 111 (5) of the UNCLOS the right of hot pursuit may be exercised only by warships or military aircraft, or other ships or aircraft clearly marked and identifiable as being on government service and authorized to that effect. We can conclude that the right of hot pursuit may be exercised by military aircraft. According to the Article 110 of the UNCLOS a warship which encounters on the high seas a foreign ship, is not justified in boarding it unless there is reasonable ground for suspecting that: (a) the ship is engaged in piracy, (b) the ship is engaged in the slave trade, (c) the ship is engaged in an unauthorized broadcasting and the flag State of the warship has jurisdiction under article 109, (d) the ship is without nationality, or (e) though flying a foreign flag or refusing to show its flag, the ship is, in reality, of the same nationality as the warship. These provisions apply mutatis mutandis to military aircraft. As for Air Defence Identification Zone (ADIZ) it is established and declared unilaterally by the air force of a state for the national security. However, there are no articles dealing with it in the 1944 Chicago Convention and there are no international standards to recognize or prohibit the establishment of ADIZs. ADIZ is not interpreted as the expansion of territorial airspace.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.2
• /
• pp.139-161
• /
• 2009

The idea of establishing an International Court of Air and Space Law (hereinafter referred to ICASL) is only my academic and practical opinion as first proposal in the global community. The establishment of the International Court of Air and Space Law can promote the speed and promote fairness of the trial in air and space law cases. The creation of an ICASL would lead to strengthening of the international cooperation deemed essential by the global community towards joint settlement in the transnational air and space cases, claims and would act as a catalyst for the efforts and solution on aircraft, satellite and space shuttle's accidents and cases and all manpower, information, trial and lawsuit to be centrally managed in an independent fashion to the benefit of global community. The aircraft, satellite and spacecraft's accidents attributes to the particular and different features between the road, railway and maritime's accidents. These aircraft, satellite and spacecraft's accidents have incurred many disputes between the victims and the air and space carriers in deciding on the limited or unlimited liability for compensation and the appraisal of damages caused by the aircraft's accidents, terror attack, satellite, space shuttle's accidents and space debris. This International Court of Air and Space Law could hear any claim growing out of both international air and space crash accidents and transnational accidents in which plaintiffs and defendants are from different nations. This alternative would eliminate the lack of uniformity of decisions under the air and space conventions, protocols and agreements. In addition, national courts would no longer have to apply their own choice of law analysis in choosing the applicable liability limits or un-limit for cases that do not fall under the air and space system. Thus, creation of an International Court of Air and Space Law would eliminate any disparity of damage awards among similarly situated passengers and shippers in nonmembers of air and space conventions, protocols, agreements and cases. Furthermore, I would like to explain the main items of the abovementioned Draft for the Convention or Statute of the International Court of Air and Space Law framed in comparison with the Statute of the International Court of Justice, the Statue of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea and the Statute of the International Criminal Court. First of all, in order to create the International Court of Air and Space Law, it is necessary for us to legislate a Draft for the Convention on the Establishment of the International Court of Air and Space Law. This Draft for the Convention must include the elected method of judges, term, duty and competence of judge, chambers, jurisdiction, hearing and judgment of the ICASL. The members of the Court shall be elected by the General Assembly and Council of the ICAO and by the General Assembly and Legal Committee of the UNCOPUOS from a list of persons nominated by the national groups in the six continent (the North American, South American, African, Oceania and Asian Continent) and two international organization such as ICAO and UNCOPUOS. The members of the Court shall be elected for nine years and may be re-elected as one time. However, I would like to propose a creation an International Court of Air and Space Law in extending jurisdiction to the International Court of Justice at the Hague to in order to decide the air and space convention‘s cases. My personal opinion is that if an International Court on Air and Space Law will be created in future, it will be settled quickly and reasonably the difficulty and complicated disputes, cases or lawsuit between the wrongdoer and victims and the injured person caused by aircraft, satellite, spacecraft's accidents or hijacker and terrorists etc. on account of deciding the standard of judgment by judges of that’s court. It is indeed a great necessary and desirable for us to make a new Draft for the Convention on a creation of the International Court of Air and Space Law to handle international air and space crash litigation. I shall propose to make a new brief Draft for the Convention on the Creation of an International Court of Air and Space Law in the near future.

• The Journal of Fisheries Business Administration
• /
• v.39 no.2
• /
• pp.81-108
• /
• 2008

Since the declaration made by UN Convention on the Law of the Sea on EEZs, The open seas of Northeast Asia, considerd as a convention area, needed new agreements in conformity with the changes brought by the introduction of the Exclusive Economic Zone(EEZ) system. The Contracting Parties of these agreements set up their own EEZs, which extend certain ranges from their baselines, Fishing in the other party's EEZ is done based on mutual agreements, which take into account traditional fishing activity in the zones. Seperate fishries management systems, in accordance with the relevant legal status of the waters, are applied to individual overlapping areas: Middle Zone in the Bast Sea and the waters south of jeju Island, Interim Measure Zone in the Yellow Sea and East China Sea, and the Transitional Zone in the Yellow Sea. They decided to conclude fisheries agreements as the provisional agreement under Article 74(3) of the UN Convention before the delimitations of the EEZs to avoid the territorial disputes. China and Japan concluded the Fishries Agreement in the November 1997, allowing each coastal State 52 mile EEZ. it was followed by Korea and Japan in September 1998, reaching a final compromise. And also Korea and China came to a satisfactary settlement in November 1998. Fisheries agreements have been established between the three North-east Asian States, the agreement are all bilateral. That implies inefficient resource management on the overlapping waters of the three states, especially on the East China Sea. The Korea-Japan Fisheries Agreement and the China-Japan Fishery Agreement worked as governing rules in the North-east Asian seas before the establishment of EEZs (Exclusive Economic Zones). However the conclusion of the bilateral fishery agreements, Korea China and Japan have developed EEZs, and these three countries have competed for the exploitation of fisheries resources. Therefore, the issue of fisheries resource management was no longer a single countries' problem and emerged as a common issue facing these three countries. In recognition of the above-mentioned problem, it is needed for the construction of cooperative System fishery management in the North-east Asian seas. Therefore, cooperative measures should be establishied. The final goal of the construction of fisheries management cooperative system is to establish sustainable fisheries in the North-east Asian seas. However, there is a big difference in fisheries management tools, fishing gear, exploitation rate of species, etc. This implies that a careful approach should be taken in order to achieve the cooperative fisheries management among Korea, China and Japan. conclusionly, the Governments of Korea, China and Japan should complement three bilateral agreemens, and which they prepares to 'Fisheries Resource Restore Program' Between Korea, China and Japan in the adjacent waters south of Jeju Island.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.45
• /
• pp.60-90
• /
• 2019

The use of the high seas are supported by the two pillars of customary principles --the freedom of navigation and the flag state control on its vessels, which are codified in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea. There have been attempts to limit and retrain the two pillars as maritime regimes are newly created to address new maritime threats, while coastal stares' control over the seas expand. The pillars have been created over thousands years since human beings took to the sea and have served as a foundation to use the oceans peacefully and orderly. Therefore, any retreat or exception from these principles would undermine the fundamental framework for the use of the oceans and eventually these regimes would be subject to control of maritime powers. In conclusion, new maritime regimes such as the sanction measures on North Korea should be enforced within the framework of international law and comply with the fundamental principles such as innocent passage and the freedom of navigation at the high seas.