• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.427-468
• /
• 2015

To date, we have considered the theoretical views, the standpoint of states and the discourse within the international community such as the UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space(COPUOS) regarding the Air/Outer Space Boundary Question which is one of the first issues of UN COPUOS established in line with marking the starting point of Outer Space Area. As above mentioned, discussions in the United Nations and among scholars of within each state regarding the delimitation issue often saw a division between those in favor of a functional approach (the functionalists) and those seeking the delineation of a boundary (the spatialists). The spatialists emphasize that the boundary between air and outer space should be delimited because the status of outer space is a type of public domain from which sovereign jurisdiction is excluded, as stated in Article 2 of Outer Space Treaty. On the contrary art. I of Chicago Convention is evidence of the acknowledgement of sovereignty over airspace existing as an international customary law, has the binding force of which exists independently of the Convention. The functionalists, backed initially by the major space powers, which viewed any boundary demarcation as possibly restricting their access to space, whether for peaceful or non-military purposes, considered it insufficient or inadequate to delimit a boundary of outer space without obvious scientific and technological evidences. Last more than 50 years there were large development in the exploration and use of outer space. But a large number states including those taking the view of a functionalist have taken on a negative attitude. As the element of location is a decisive factor for the choice of the legal regime to be applied, a purely functional approach to the regulation of activities in the space above the Earth does not offer a solution. It seems therefore to welcome the arrival of clear evidence of a growing recognition of and national practices concerning a spatial approach to the problem is gaining support both by a large number of States as well as by publicists. The search for a solution to the problem of demarcating the two different legal regimes governing the space above Earth has undoubtedly been facilitated and a number of countries including Russia have already advocated the acceptance of the lowest perigee boundary of outer space at a height of 100km. As a matter of fact the lowest perigee where space objects are still able to continue in their orbiting around the earth has already been imposed as a natural criterion for the delimitation of outer space. This delimitation of outer space has also been evidenced by the constant practice of a large number of States and their tacit consent to space activities accomplished so far at this distance and beyond it. Of course there are still numerous opposing views on the delineation of a outer space boundary by space powers like U.S.A., England, France and so on. Therefore, first of all to solve the legal issues faced by the international community in outer space activities like delimitation problem, there needs a positive and peaceful will of international cooperation. From this viewpoint, President John F. Kennedy once described the rationale behind the outer space activities in his famous "Moon speech" given at Rice University in 1962. He called upon Americans and all mankind to strive for peaceful cooperation and coexistence in our future outer space activities. And Kennedy explained, "There is no strife, ${\ldots}$ nor any international conflict in outer space as yet. But its hazards are hostile to us all: Its conquest deserves the best of all mankind, and its opportunity for peaceful cooperation may never come again." This speech seems to even present us in the contemporary era with ample suggestions for further peaceful cooperation in outer space activities including the delimitation of outer space.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.18
• /
• pp.185-209
• /
• 2003

이 논문은 21세기 우주개발로 인하여 제기되는 국제우주법의 장래 과제를 분석한 것이며 따라서 1967년 우주조약을 비롯한 기존의 5개 국제우주조약들과 '연성법'(soft law)으로서의 우주법인 5개의 UN결의들은 간략하게 소개하고 lex ferenda로서 제기되는 문제들을 중심으로 연구하였다. 21세기 국제우주법의 lex ferenda로 제기되는 문제는 다음과 같다. 첫째. 우주의 정의 및 경계획정문제와 지구정지궤도(GSO)의 성격과 활용의 문제가' 외기권 우주의 평화적 이용에 관한 위원회'(COPUOS)의 법률소위원회를 중심으로 어떻게 진행되고 있는가 하는 문제를 검토하였고, 둘째. 대기권 상공과 외기권 우주를 비행할 수 있는 새로운 우주운송수단으로 등장하고 있는 우주항공기(Aerospace Vehicle)가 기존의 항공법과 우주법의 관계에서 어떠한 법의 적용을 받아야 하는가의 문제를 검토하였다. 셋째. 그리고 통신위성을 이용하면서 발생하는 저작권법(copy right law) 및 지적재산권(intellectual property) 등의 문제 그리고 우주보험을 포함한 우주의 상업적 이용에서 발생하는 법규범의 문제를 검토하였고, 넷째. 우주활동으로 인해 발생하는 우주잔해(space debris)와 우주환경문제를 다루었다. 마지막으로 그리고 기타 국제우주법관련문제 특히 우주활동을 원활하게 수행하기 위한 '우주물체'(space objects)와 그와 관련된 용어들의 정확한 개념 정의를 명확하게 할 필요성과 우주의 상업적 이용과 우주의 오로지 평화적인 목적을 위하여 중요한 역할을 할 국제민간항공기구(ICAO)나 국제해사기구(IMO)와 같은 장래의 국제민간우주기구(International Civil Space Organization) 등의 설립문제를 검토하였다.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.23 no.1
• /
• pp.111-129
• /
• 2008

Denying the legitimacy of occupying any parts of the outer space satisfied the political interests of space fairing States. 'Res communis' idea was converted into the rationale which met such political needs in the best way available. This rationale, as its roman law concept implies, is based upon ownership to things. Ownership paradigm, as discussed in this paper, may be not sufficient for applying the OST. A new paradigm may be more valuable. Diversified type of the right to use would be best available one. Space commercialization should be understood in social and economical dimension, which is too diverse and important for space lawyers, especially adhering to ownership paradigm, to deal with. It is mature to admit that res communis rationale operated for 40 years is not sufficiently refined to foster the advent and benefit expected from space commercialization. Diversified type of right to use is to be taken into account seriously, as workable paradigm provided by other social science.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.29 no.1
• /
• pp.127-160
• /
• 2014

The UN COPUOS was established in 1959 as a permanent committee of the UN General Assembly with the aims to promote international cooperation in peaceful uses of outer space, to formulate space-related programmes within the UN, to encourage research and dissemination of information on space, and to study legal problems arising from the outer space activities. Its members have been enlarged from 24 members in 1959 to 76 in 2014. The Legal Subcommittee, which has been established under COPUOS in 1962 to deal with legal problems associated with space activities, through its first three decades of work has set up a framework of international space law: the five treaties and agreements - namely the Outer Space Treaty, Rescue Agreement, Liability Convention, Registration Convention, Moon Agreement - and the five declarations and legal principles. However, some sceptical views on this legal framework has been expressed, concerning the applicability of existing international space law to practical issues and new kinds of emerging space activities. UNISPACE III, which took place in 1999, served as a momentum to revitalize the discussions of the legal issues faced by the international community in outer space activities. The agenda of the Legal Subcommittee is currently structured into three categories: regular items, single issue/items, and items considered under a multi-year workplan. The regular items, which deal with basic legal issues, include definition and delimitation of outer space, status and application of the five UN treaties on outer space, and national legislation relevant to the peaceful exploration and use of outer space. The single issues/items, which are decided upon the preceding year, are discussed only for one year in the plenary unless renewed. They include items related to the use of nuclear power sources in outer space and to the space debris mitigation. The agenda items considered under a multi-year work plan are discussed in working group. Items under this category deal with non-legally binding UN instruments on outer space and international mechanism for cooperation. In recent years, the Subcommittee has made some progress on agenda items related to nuclear power sources, space debris, and international cooperation by means of establishing non-legally binding instruments, or soft law. The Republic of Korea became the member state of COPUOS in 2001, after rotating seats every two years with Cuba and Peru since 1994. Korea's joining of COPUOS seems to be late, in considering that some countries with hardly any space activity, such Chad, Sierra Leone, Kenya, Lebanon, Cameroon, joined COPUOS as early as 1960s and 1970s and contributed to the drafting of the aforementioned treaties, declarations, and legal principles. Given the difficulties to conclude a treaty and un urgency to regulate newly emerging space activities, Legal Subcommittee now focuses its effort on developing soft law such as resolutions and guideline to be adopted by UN General Assembly. In order to have its own practices reflected in the international practices, one of the constituent elements of international customary law, Korea should analyse its technical capability, policy, and law related to outer space activities and participate actively in the formation process of the soft law.

• 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.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.32 no.1
• /
• pp.287-325
• /
• 2017

Considering the development of aerospace, military science and technology since the 20th century, the sky is very important for the nation's existence and prosperity. The proverb "Whosoever commands the space commands the world itself!" emphasizes the need for the command of the air. This essay is the first study on the status of airspace after reunification. First, the territorial airspace is over the territory and territorial sea, and its horizontal extent is determined by the territorial boundary lines. Acceptance of the present order is most reasonable, rather than attempting to reconfigure through historical truths about border issues, and it could be supported by neighboring countries in the reunification period. For peace in Northeast Asia, the reunified Korea needs to respect the existing border agreement between North Korea and China or Russia. However, the North Korean straight baselines established in the East Sea and the Yellow Sea should be discarded because they are not available under United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea. It is desirable for the reunified Korea to redefine the straight baselines that comply with international law and determine the territorial waters up to and including the 12-nautical mile outside it. Second, the Flight Information Region (hereinafter "FIR") is a region defined by the International Civil Aviation Organization (hereinafter "ICAO") in order to provide information necessary for the safe and efficient flight of aircraft and the search and rescue of aircraft. At present, Korea is divided into Incheon FIR which is under the jurisdiction of South Korea and Pyongyang FIR which is under the jurisdiction of North Korea. If North Korea can not temporarily exercise control of Pyongyang FIR due to a sudden change of circumstances, it is desirable for South Korea to exercise control of Pyongyang FIR, and if it is unavoidable, ICAO should temporarily exercise it. In reunified Korea, it is desirable to abolish Pyongyang FIR and integrate it into Incheon FIR with the approval of ICAO, considering systematic management and control of FIR, establishment of route, and efficiency of management. Third, the Air Defense Identification Zone (hereinafter "ADIZ") is a zone that requires easy identification, positioning, and control of aircraft for national security purposes, and is set up unilaterally by the country concerned. The US unilaterally established the Korea Air Defense Identification Area (KADIZ) by the Declaration of Commitment on March 22, 1951. The Ministry of Defense proclaimed a new KADIZ which extended to the area including IEODO on December 13, 2013. At present, North Korea's military warning zone is set only at maritime boundaries such as the East Sea and the Yellow Sea. But in view of its lack of function as ADIZ in relations with China and Russia, the reunified Korea has no obligation to succeed it. Since the depth of the Korean peninsula is short, it is necessary to set ADIZ boundary on the outskirts of the territorial airspace to achieve the original purpose of ADIZ. Therefore, KADIZ of the reunified Korea should be newly established by the boundary line that coincides with the Incheon FIR of the reunified Korea. However, if there is no buffer zone overlapping with or adjacent to the ADIZs of neighboring countries, military tensions may rise. Therefore, through bilateral negotiations for peace in Northeast Asia, a buffer zone is established between adjacent ADIZs.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.32 no.2
• /
• pp.189-217
• /
• 2017

Declaration of Air Defense and Identification Zones started with the United States in 1950, which was followed by declaration of KADIZ by the Republic of Korea in 1951. Initial ADIZ were solely linked with air defense missions, but their roles have changed as nations around the globe manifested a tendency to expand their influence over maritime resources and rights. In particular, China declared ADIZ over the East China Sea in October 2013 and forced all passing aircraft to submit flight plan to ATC or military authority, saying failure of submission will be followed by armed engagement. China announced it would declare another zone over the South China Sea despite the ongoing conflict in the area, clearly showing ADIZ's direct connection with territorial claim and EEZ and that it serves as a zone within which a nation can execute its rights. The expanded KADIZ, which was expanded in Dec 15, 2013 in response to Chinese actions, overlaps with the Chinese ADIZ over the East China Sea and the Japanese ADIZ. The overlapping zone is an airspace over waters where not only the Republic of Korea but also of China and Japan argue to be covering their continental shelf and EEZ. Military conventions were signed to prevent contingencies among the neighboring nations while conducting identifications in KADIZ, including the overlapping zone. If such military conventions and practice of air defense identification continue to be respected among states, it is under the process of turning into a regional customary law, although ADIZ is not yet recognized by international law or customary law. Moreover, identification within ADIZ is carried out by military authorities of states, and misguided customary procedures may cause serious negative consequences for national security since it may negatively impact neighboring countries in marking the maritime border, which calls for formulation of operation rules that account for other state activities and military talks among regional stake holders. Legal frameworks need to be in place to guarantee freedom of flights over international seas which UN Maritime Law protects, and laws regarding military aircraft operation need to be supplemented to not make it a requirement to submit flight plan if the aircraft does not invade sovereign airspace. Organizational instructions that require approval of Chairman of Joint Chiefs of Staff for entrance and exit of ADIZ for military aircraft need to be amended to change the authority to Minister of National Defense or be promoted to a law to be applicable for commercial aircraft. Moreover, in regards to operation and management of ADIZ, transfer of authority should be prohibited to account for its evolution into a regional customary law in South East Asia. In particular, since ADIZ is set over EEZ, military conventions that yield authority related to national security should never be condoned. Among Korea, China, Japan and Russia, there are military conventions that discuss operation and management of ADIZ in place or under negotiation, meaning that ADIZ is becoming a regional customary law in North East Asia region.