해양경계획정을 위한 특별한 상황의 검토 = Examination of Special Circumstances for Maritime Boundaries Delimitation

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Every State has common interests in the oceans. These interests led to the extension of maritime jurisdictional zone, and the extension of its has brought the dispute about maritime boundaries delimitation. International community has convened United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea for the purpose of governing use of oceans. As a result, they has concluded four Geneva Conventions about use of oceans in 1958, and United Nation Convention on the Law of the Sea in 1984. Rules for delimiting maritime boundaries have also been negotiated at this conferences, they agreed on the rules of maritime boundaries delimitation, but dropped the specific rules. The Territorial Sea Conventions and the Continental Convention in 1958 provided median or equidistance methods and special circumstances, but did not explained what special circumstances are. Also UNCLOS articulated the equitable result, but did not suggested the specific methods for achieving equitable result.
It is clear that we must consider principle of equity for equitable maritime boundaries delimitation. Also considering principle of equity is the same as thinking special circumstances in the particular cases. In this paper I will explain the role of equity in the maritime boundaries delimitation and what special circumstances mean. In the North Continental case, ICJ said that ‘there is no legal limit to the considerations which States may take account of for the purpose of making sure that they apply equitable procedures.’ therefore we cannot make norms about special circumstance, but can categorize them by analyzing the precedents. I will explain three categories of special circumstances in this paper. The first circumstances are geographical factors, the second things are geological factors, and the last are social, economic and environmental factors.
In theory, equity means perfect equilibrium but realistically indicates the closest status to the equilibrium, so I think we must make efforts not to happen the unequitable results in the cases.

목차 (Table of Contents)

• Ⅰ. 서론
• Ⅱ. 해양경계획정과 형평
• Ⅲ. ‘형평한 해결’을 위한 형평의 객관화
• Ⅳ. 결론
• 〈Abstract〉

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 김현수, "해양경계획정에 관한 소고" 12 (12): 70-, 2000

2 이석용, "한국의 해양경계선: 형평의 원칙의 적용" 40 (40): 182-, 1995

3 이영준, "한국 대륙붕의 경계획정에 따른 대륙붕 개념의 재고에 관한 고찰" 10 : 139-, 1980

4 이상면, "튀니지⋅리비아간의 대륙붕에 관한 사건" 서울대학교 23 (23): 106-108, 1982

5 정진석, "주요 판례를 통해 본 해양경계획정의 최근 동향" 국민대학교 법학연구소 17 : 267-268, 2005

6 전순신, "북해대륙붕 사건-North sea Continental shelf cases-" 동아대학교 (7) : 244-, 1988

7 박종성, "대륙붕의 범위와 我國鑛區의 법적 호보" 11 : 243-, 1977

8 이영진, "대륙붕 경계획정에 관한 법원칙 추이와 한국주변 대륙붕의 경계 문제" 충남대학교 7 (7): 18-, 1995

9 김석균, "국제판례를 통해 본 해양경계획정의 원칙에 관한 소고" 한국해사법학회 21 (21): 225-250, 2009

10 김찬규, "공유대륙붕의 경계획정에 있어서의 문제점" 17 (17): 32-, 1971

11 박용현, "공유대륙붕의 경계획정" 조선대학교 8 : 170-, 1985

12 Philip C. Jessup, "United Nations Conference on the Law of the Sea" 59 : 234-235, 1959

13 김찬규, "UN해양법협약 중 몇 가지 문제" 28 (28): 130-131, 1983

14 Sayre Archie Swarztrauber, "Three Mile Limit of Territorial Seas" Naval Institute Press 20-, 1972

15 Thomas Wemyss Fulton, "The Sovereignty of the Sea: An Historical Account of the Claims of England to the Dominion of the British Seas, and of the Evolution of the Territorial Waters" Lawbook Exchange Ltd 537-692, 2002

16 S.H. Rosenne, "The Settlement of Disputes in the New Law of the Sea" 401 : 402-404, 1978

17 Arthur H. Dean, "The Second Geneva Conference on the Law of the Sea: The Fight for freedom of the Seas" 54 : 751-761, 1960

18 Percey Thomas Fenn, "The Origin of the Right of Fishery in Territorial Waters" Harvard University Press 3-149, 1926

19 Victor Prescott, "The Maritime Poitical Boundaries of the World, 2nd" Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 215-, 2005

20 E.D. Brown, "The Legal Regime of Hydrospace. in: Relevant Circumstances and Maritime Delimitation" Oxford University Press 78-, 1989

21 Arvid Pardo, "The Law of the Sea: Its Past and Its Future" 63 (63): 14-, 1984

22 R.R. Churchill, "The Law of the Sea" Manchester University Press 187-, 1999

23 Hugo Grotius, "The Freedom of the Seas or the Right Which Belongs to the Dutch to Take Part in the East Indian Trade, Ralph Van Deman Magoffin trans" Batoche Books Limited 23-24, 2000

24 P.B. Beazley, "Technical aspects of maritime boundary delimitation" International Boundaries Research Unit 1 (1): 7-, 1994

25 Yoshifumi Tanaka, "Reflections on Maritime Delimitation in the Qatar/Bahrain Case" 52 : 53-77, 2003

26 Rodman R. Bundy, "Preparing for a Delimitation Case: The Practitioner's View. in: Maritime Delimitation" Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 96-, 2006

27 Jonathan I. Charney, "Ocean Boundaries between Nations: A Theory for Progress" 78 : 582-583, 1984

28 L. Legault, "Method, Oppositeness and Adjacency, and Proportionality in Maritime Boundary Delimitation. in: International Maritime Boundaries" Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 203-, 1993

29 Jonathan I. Charney, "International Maritime Boundaries, Vol. I, II" Martinus Nijhoff Publishers 1993

30 Juraj Andrassy, "International Law and the Resources of the Sea" Columbia University Press 95-96, 1970

31 Lee Seokyong, "Equity in International law of the Sea" 38 (38): 183-, 1993

32 R. Jennings, "Equity and Equitable Principles" 42 : 27-32, 1986

33 Natalie Klein, "Dispute Settlement in the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea" Cambridge Univ. Press 1-, 2005