Journal of the Korean Society of Marine Environment & Safety (해양환경안전학회지)

The Korean Society of Marine Environment and safety (해양환경안전학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Analysis on the Responsibility and Exemption Clause of COLREG Rule 2

국제해상충돌예방규칙 제2조에 따른 책임과 면책에 관한 분석

  • Kim, Inchul (Division of Navigation and Information Systems, Mokpo National Maritime University)
  • 김인철 (목포해양대학교 항해정보시스템학부)
  • Received : 2021.12.21
  • Accepted : 2022.02.25
  • Published : 2022.02.28
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

The Marine Accident Investigation and Tribunal System is intended to provide a credible solution to prevent the recurrence of similar accidents. When a marine accident occurs, the Korea Maritime Safety Tribunal seeks to find its root causes through an analysis of what provoked the accident. It also contributes to the development of safety policies or practices by making a decision based on the findings. However, if the decision presented as the root cause of a marine accident is ambiguous or unclear, it may be difficult to achieve its intended goal. Hence, if we read some of the decisions of the Maritime Safety Tribunal, it is selective to directly apply the cause of an accident as a source of the measures that can prevent its recurrence. A typical example of this is the expression: "when a seafarer neglects ordinary practice of seaman." The term "ordinary practice of seaman" has been criticized for being used in some decisions like a master key where it is not easy to determine which specific rules or regulations were violated or blame the involved seafarers. Such term is present in Article 2 of the International Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972. For the proper use of the term, this paper seeks to compare and establish the concepts of "ordinary practice of seaman" and the duty of care by providing a systematic interpretation of the original text. In addition, the duty of care was reviewed from the perspective of administrative, civil, and criminal laws. Furthermore, relevant legal precedents were reviewed and presented in the study. Accordingly, it is expected that the term "ordinary practice of seaman" would be properly used in decisions that contribute to the prevention of the recurrence of similar marine accidents.

해양사고의 조사 및 심판 제도는 유사 사고의 재발을 방지하기 위한 공신력 있는 해결책을 제공하기 위한 것이다. 우리나라의 경우 해양사고가 발생하면 해양안전심판원은 사고의 과정을 정밀하게 분석하여 사고 원인을 공표함으로써 재발방지대책 개발에 기여하고 있다. 그러나 해양사고의 원인으로 제시된 내용이 모호하다면 소기의 목적을 달성하는 데는 어려움이 있을 수 있다. 이러한 관점에서 해양안전심판원의 재결을 살펴보면 일부 사고의 원인으로 적시한 내용을 재발방지대책으로 직접 대입하기 곤란한 몇 몇 경우가 있다. 대표적으로 '선원의 상무로서 준수하여야 할 주의의무를 태만히 한 경우'라는 표현을 들 수 있다. 또한 '선원의 상무'가 정확한 사고원인을 밝히기 어려운 경우에도 선원의 책임으로 돌리기 위하여 관용적으로 사용되고 있다는 비판도 있다. 선원의 상무는 국제해상충돌예방규칙 제2조에 나오는 용어로서 그 사용을 엄격히 하고자, 이 연구에서는 원문에 대한 체계적인 분석을 제공함으로써 선원의 상무와 주의의무에 대한 개념을 비교·정립하고자 한다. 이를 위해 주의의무를 행정적, 민사적, 형사적 시각에서 살펴보고 관련된 판례를 제시하였다. 이에 따라 선원의 상무가 유사 해양사고 재발방지에 기여하는 합목적적인 재결을 위한 용도로 사용되기를 기대하였다.

Keywords

References

  1. Cheong, Y. S.(2014), The legal effect of Rule 2 (a) of COLREG in Korean Legal System, Donga Law Lab, No. 62, pp. 407-431
  2. Chung, Y. N.(2018), Review of criminal duty of care as risk management measures, Journal of the Korean Criminal Law Association, Vol. 30, No. 2, pp. 155-182.
  3. Jung, Y. J. and J. Y. Kim(2018), Research on the systematic position of Duty of Care, Law Study, Vol. 21, No. 3, pp. 71-96.
  4. Kim, I. C. and D. Y. Jung(2020), Regulations for Preventing Collisions at Sea, Doonam Publisher, Seoul, p. 48.
  5. Kim, J. D.(2005), Navigation in Port and Explanation of Judicial Precedents, Moonwonsa, Seoul, p. 337.
  6. Lim, S. W.(2020), A study about legal efect of navigation's mistake on fishing vessels collision accident - Focused on the Korea maritime safety tribunal judgement with lights and shapes, Proceedings of the 2020 Spring Conference of the Korea Institute of Maritime Law, pp. 31-49.
  7. MOLEG(2021a), Ministry of Government Legislation, Retrieved on 2021. 7. 3. from https://www.lawmaking.go.kr/lmKnlg/jdgStd/info?astSeq=2283&astClsCd=CF0101.
  8. MOLEG(2021b), Ministry of Government Legislation, Retrieved on 2021. 7. 3. from https://www.easylaw.go.kr/CSP/OnhunqueansInfoRetrieve.laf?onhunqnaAstSeq=85&onhunqueSeq=2195&search_put=%EC%A3%BC%EC%9D%98%EC%9D%98%EB%AC%B4.
  9. New1(2021), Retrieved on 2021. 7. 3. from https://news.v.daum.net/v/20210628060003111?f=p.
  10. Park, Y. S.(2015), Domestic Legal Effect in Korea of "the ordinary practice of seamen", The Journal of the Korea Institute of Maritime Law, Vol.37, No.1, pp. 183-215.
  11. Shin, D. W.(2011), Administrative Criminal Law and Punishment of Negligible Offenders, Seoul Law Journal, Vol. 52, No. 1, pp. 129-145
  12. Supreme Court of Korea(2003), Sentence 2003.1.24., Verdict No. 2002Da3822.
  13. Supreme Court of Korea(2006), Sentence 2006.10.26., Verdict No. 2004Do486.
  14. Yoon, J. D.(2017), COLREGs, 1972 and Related Domestic Rules in Korea, Sejong publisher, Busan, p. 50.