• 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.

• Korean Journal of Heritage: History & Science
• /
• v.48 no.4
• /
• pp.24-43
• /
• 2015

Since 2011, when Oegyujanggak Uigwe(Records of the State Rites of the Joseon Dynasty) were returned from France, which were looted in 1866 by the French Navy, national attention to our cultural properties abroad was explosively increased and public pressure has been mounting that those cultural properties should be returned in Korea. According to the statistics of "Overseas Korean Cultural Heritage Foundation" Korean cultural Properties, which exist in foreign countries, amounts 160,342 in total 20 countries. Among them about half of them are estimated to be illegally exported cultural property, these are to be restituted. However, in reality it is not so easy to restitute illegally exported cultural properties. For this, it needs to be established a long-term and systematic plan for return of cultural properties from other countries. This paper starts from such a critical mind and tries to find legal policy measures for the return of illegally exported cultural properties. To this end, the author first describes motive and aim of this research in chapter I. and overviews basic understanding and current situation of export of cultural property as well as means and methods of return of cultural property in chapter II. and then deals with international and national norms that are involved in the dispute concerned return of cultural properties in chapter III. Based on this research, in chapter IV., which can be considered as a key part of this paper, the author proposed nine legal policy measures for restitution of cultural properties from foreign countries. That is, actual condition survey of cultural properties in foreign countries, unified management and implement of export ID on cultural properties, fund-raising for the diversification of means of return of cultural properties. local utilization of cultural properties, joining in the multilateral conventions and expansion of the bilateral agreements, restitution and cooperation through international organizations, restitution through lawsuit and arbitration, training experts on restitution of cultural property and networking with foreign experts. Finally, the author summarized his opinion in chapter V. which comprehended researching the above.

• Strategy21
• /
• s.46
• /
• pp.239-276
• /
• 2020

The failure of early economic sanctions aimed at hurting the overall economies of targeted states called for a more sophisticated design of economic sanctions. This paved way for the advent of 'smart sanctions,' which target the supporters of the regime instead of the public mass. Despite controversies over the effectiveness of economic sanctions as a coercive tool to change the behavior of a targeted state, the transformation from 'comprehensive sanctions' to 'smart sanctions' is gaining the status of a legitimate method to impose punishment on states that do not conform to international norms, the nonproliferation of weapons of mass destruction in this particular context of the paper. The five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council proved that it can come to an accord on imposing economic sanctions over adopting resolutions on waging military war with targeted states. The North Korean nuclear issue has been the biggest security threat to countries in the region, even for China out of fear that further developments of nuclear weapons in North Korea might lead to a 'domino-effect,' leading to nuclear proliferation in the Northeast Asia region. Economic sanctions had been adopted by the UNSC as early as 2006 after the first North Korean nuclear test and has continually strengthened sanctions measures at each stage of North Korean weapons development. While dubious of the effectiveness of early sanctions on North Korea, recent sanctions that limit North Korea's exports of coal and imports of oil seem to have an impact on the regime, inducing Kim Jong-un to commit to peaceful talks since 2018. The purpose of this paper is to add a variable to the factors determining the success of economic sanctions on North Korea: preventing North Korea's evasion efforts by conducting illegal transshipments at sea. I first analyze the cause of recent success in the economic sanctions that led Kim Jong-un to engage in talks and add the maritime element to the argument. There are three conditions for the success of the sanctions regime, and they are: (1) smart sanctions, targeting commodities and support groups (elites) vital to regime survival., (2) China's faithful participation in the sanctions regime, and finally, (3) preventing North Korea's maritime evasion efforts.

• Asia-Pacific Journal of Business Venturing and Entrepreneurship
• /
• v.7 no.2
• /
• pp.113-127
• /
• 2012

From the end of 1st quarter of 2012, Korean mandatory firms had started releasing financial reports conforming to the K-IFRS(Korean adopted International Financial Reporting Standards). Major characteristics of IFRS, such as 'principles based' features, consolidated reporting, 'fair value' measurement, increased pressure for non-financial disclosures have resulted in brief and various disclosure practices regarding the main body of each statements and vast amount of note description requirements. Meanwhile, a host of previous studies on IFRS disclosures have incorporated regulatory and/or 'compete information' perspectives, mainly focusing on suggesting further enforcement of strengthened requirements and providing guidelines for specific treatments. Thus, as an extension of prior findings and suggestions this study had explored to conduct an integrative approach embracing views of the reporting entities and the users of financial information. In spite of all the state-driven efforts for faithful representation and comparability of corporate financial reports, an overhaul of disclosure practices of fiscal year 2010 and 2011 had revealed numerous cases of insufficiency and discordance in terms of mandatory norms and market expectations. As to the causes of such shortcomings, this study identified several factors from the corporate side and the users of the information; some inherent aspects of IFRS, industry/corporate-specific context, expenditures related to internalizing IFRS system, reduced time frame for presentation. lack of clarity and details to meet the quality of information - understandability, comparability etc. - commonly requested by the user group. In order to improve current disclosure practices, dual approach had been suggested; Firstly, to encourage and facilitate implementation, (1) further segmentation and differentiation of mandates among companies, (2) redefining the scope and depth of note descriptions, (3) diversification and coordination of reporting periods, (4) providing support for equipping disclosure systems and granting incentives for best practices had been discussed. Secondly, as for the hard measures, (5) regularizing active involvement of corporate and user group delegations in the establishment and amendment process of K-IFRS (6) enforcing detailed and standardized disclosure on reporting entities had been recommended.