• 시큐리티연구
• /
• 제20호
• /
• pp.339-363
• /
• 2009

세계화시대에 해외투자와 무역, 선교, 여행 등으로 우리국민의 활동영역이 해마다 점점 커지고 있는 상황에서 위험지역에 노출된 한국인들의 인질납치의 가능성과 위협은 매우 높아졌다. 테러조직이나 공해상의 해적집단들이 인질 납치를 자신들의 주장을 효과적으로 전달할 수 있는 좋은 수단으로 인식하면서 세계적으로 인질납치가 갈수록 빈발하고 있다. 서방 사람들을 주로 납치했던 국제 테러단체들이 공격 대상을 확대하여 한국인을 포함시킴에 따라 2004년 김선일 납치살해사건, 2007년 7월19일 아프가니스탄 탈레반 무장 세력의 선교봉사단 피랍사태, 2009년 3월15일 예멘의 한국인 관광객 폭탄테러사건 등의 사태가 발생하였고, 동남아시아, 아프리카 등 공해상의 해적집단에 의해 선박과 함께 한국인의 인질납치 사건(동원호 납치사건, 마부노호 인질납치사건 등) 또한 급증하고 있는 상황이다. 인질납치는 사건의 특성상 무력으로 해결하려다 실패하고 인질이 살해될 경우 심한 도덕적 비난을 감수하여야 하고 해당 국가기관에 엄청난 압력과 영향을 주기 때문에 해당 정부나 기업이 웬만하면 몸값을 지불하고 해결하려 들 수밖에 없다. 이러한 맥락에서 본 연구에서는 해외에서 발생한 한국인의 인질납치사건을 분석하고 종결과정을 통해 나타난 문제점을 도출하여 우리국민의 안전과 국가위기의 상황을 다시 인식하고 그에 따른 해외한국인에 대한 인질납치사건의 예방과 대응 방향을 제시하는 목적에서 전개되었다. 따라서 본 연구에서 도출된 내용을 통해 향후 해외한국인에 대한 인질납치사건에 대한 예방과 기본방향을 제시하면 다음과 같다. 첫째, 국가통제력 감소와 제도권 밖의 사건에 대한 구체적이고도 명확한 정책적 대안이 필요하다. 둘째, 국제정치에 대한 이해와 한국의 총체적 외교역량을 재차 점검할 필요가 있다. 셋째, 위험지역에 대한 철저한 정보역량과 위험지역에 무방비 상태의 한국 국민이 노출되는 것을 사전에 적극적으로 방지하는 등 정부의 적극적인 기법연구와 대책이 필요하다. 넷째, 한국인은 대내외적으로 국민 개개인의 안전 불감증 고취와 테러에 대한 경각심을 더욱 높여야 하며, 정부의 시책에 적극 따를 수 있는 국민의 공감대 형성이 절실하다.

• 해양환경안전학회지
• /
• 제28권6호
• /
• pp.955-964
• /
• 2022

최근 5년간 국내에서 발생한 해양사고를 선박용도별로 살펴보면 어선이 67.1%(10,211척)를 차지하고 있으며, 어선에 의한 해양사고는 2016년 1,646건에서 2020년 2,100건으로 매년 증가하고 있다. 특히 최근 5년간 발생한 378건의 전복사고 중 어선의 전복사고가 252건으로 66.7%의 높은 비중을 차지하고 있어 이에 따른 대책 마련이 시급한 실정이다. 본 연구에서는 어선 제66풍성호의 전복사고의 원인 규명을 위해 복원성 및 해수 유입경로 등의 자료 수집과 풍성호에 설치된 방수구, 추가 갑판 및 바람막이 등이 복원성에 미치는 영향을 정량적으로 분석 후 전복사고의 대응 방안을 제시하였다. 복원성에 영향을 주는 요인으로 풍성호에 설치된 추가 갑판, 바람막이, 방수구가 초기 횡경사를 일으키고, 복원성을 악화시키며 어선구조기준을 충족시키지 못할 뿐만 아니라 풍성호의 선형 특성 등으로 인해 복원성을 약화 시키는 것으로 분석되었다. 사고 당시의 복원성을 추정하기 위해 어로작업 시점의 복원성과 해상 상태 변화에 따른 해수 유입량 및 이에 따른 동요 상황, 그리고 선체 요인에 의한 복원성 변화를 계산하였다. 그 결과, 어로작업의 시점에서는 최소 GoM을 모두 만족하였으나 최대파고 4m에서 복원이 불가하였으며, 선체 경사에 따른 해수 유입, 동요의 영향에 의해 최대파고 4m 상태에서 최소 GoM을 만족하지 못하는 것으로 분석되었다. 그러나, 풍성호의 복원성에 영향을 미치는 요인 중 추가 갑판과 바람막이 설치를 제외한다면 최소 GoM을 만족하는 것으로 분석되었다.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제5권
• /
• pp.101-118
• /
• 1993

Generally there is no law and liability system which applies particulary to commercial space ventures. There are several international treaties and national statutes which deal with space ventures, but their impact on the liability of commercial space ventures has not been significant. Every state law in the United States will impose both tort and contract liability on those responsible for injuries or losses caused by defective products or by services performed negligently. As with the providers of other products and services, those who participate in commercial space ventures have exposure to liability in both tort and contract which is limited to the extent of the resulting damage The manufacturer of a small and cheap component which caused a satellite to fail to reach orbit or to operate nominally has the same exposure to liability as the provider of launch vehicle or the manufacturer of satellite into which the component was incorporaded. Considering the enormity of losses which may result from launch failure or satellite failure, those participated in commercial space ventures will do their best to limit their exposure to liability by contract to the extent permitted by law. In most states of the United States, contracts which limit or disclaim the liability are enforceable with respect to claims for losses or damage to property if they are drafted in compliance with the requirements of the applicable law. In California an attempt to disclaim the liability for one's own negligence will be enforceable only if the contract states explicitly that the parties intend to have the disclaimer apply to negligence claims. Most state laws of the United States will refuse to enforce contracts which attempt to disclaim the liability for gross negligence on public policy grounds. However, the public policy which favoured disclaiming the liability as to gross negligence for providers of launch services was pronounced by the United States Congress in the 1988 Amendments to the 1984 Commercial Space Launch Act. To extend the disclaimer of liability to remote purchasers, the contract of resale should state expressly that the disclaimer applies for the benefit of all contractors and subcontractors who participated in producing the product. This situation may occur when the purchaser of a satellite which has failed to reach orbit has not contracted directly with the provider of launch services. Contracts for launch services usually contain cross-waiver of liability clauses by which each participant in the launch agrees to be responsible for it's own loss and to waive any claims which it may have against other participants. The crosswaiver of liability clause may apply to the participants in the launch who are parties to the launch services agreement, but not apply to their subcontractors. The role of insurance in responding to many risks has been critical in assisting commercial space ventures grow. Today traditional property and liability insurance, such as pre-launch, launch and in-orbit insurance and third party liability insurance, have become mandatory parts of most space projects. The manufacture and pre-launch insurance covers direct physical loss or damage to the satellite, its apogee kick moter and including its related launch equipment from commencement of loading operations at the manufacture's plant until lift off. The launch and early orbit insurance covers the satellite for physical loss or damage from attachment of risk through to commissioning and for some period of initial operation between 180 days and 12 months after launch. The in-orbit insurance covers physical loss of or damage to the satellite occuring during or caused by an event during the policy period. The third party liability insurance covers the satellite owner' s liability exposure at the launch site and liability arising out of the launch and operation in orbit. In conclusion, the liability in commercial space ventures extends to any organization which participates in providing products and services used in the venture. Accordingly, it is essential for any organization participating in commercial space ventures to contractually disclaim its liability to the extent permitted by law. To achieve the effective disclaimers, it is necessary to determine the applicable law and to understand the requirements of the law which will govern the terms of the contract. A great deal of funds have been used in R&D for commercial space ventures to increase reliability, safety and success. However, the historical reliability of launches and success for commercial space ventures have proved to be slightly lower than we would have wished for. Space insurance has played an important role in reducing the high risks present in commercial space ventures.

• 무역상무연구
• /
• 제31권
• /
• pp.27-56
• /
• 2006

Today's financial institutions usually take environmental issues seriously into consideration as they could not evade lender liability in an increasing number of cases. On the international scene, a brand-new concept of the "Equator Principles" in the New Millenium has driven more and more international banks to adopt these Principles in project financing. Sustainable development has been a key word in understanding new trends of the governments, financial institutions, corporations and civic groups in the 21st century. The Equator Principles are a set of voluntary environmental and social guidelines for sustainable finance. These Principles commit bank officers to avoid financial support to projects that fail to meet these guidelines. The Principles were conceived in 2002 on an initiative of the International Finance Corporation(IFC), and launched in June 2003. Since then, dozens of major banks, accounting for up to 80 percent of project loan market, have adopted the Principles. Accordingly, the Principles have become the de facto standard for all banks and investors on how to deal with potential social and environmental issues of projects to be financed. Compliance with the Equator Principles facilitates for endorsing banks to participate in the syndicated loan and help them to manage the risks associated with large-scale projects. The Equator Principles call for financial institutions to provide loans to projects under the following circumstances: - The risk of the project is categorized in accordance with internal guidelines based upon the environmental and social screening criteria of the IFC. - For Category A and B projects, borrowers or sponsors are required to conduct a Social and Environmental Assessment, the preparation of which must meet certain requirements and satisfactorily address key social and environmental issues. - The Social and Environmental Assessment report should address baseline social and environmental conditions, requirements under host country laws and regulations, sustainable development, and, as appropriate, IFC's Environmental, Health and Safety Guidelines, etc. - Based on the Social and Environmental Assessment, Equator banks then make agreements with borrowers on how they mitigate, monitor and manage the risks through a Social and Environmental Management System. Compliance with the plan is included in the covenant clause of loan agreements. If the borrower doesn't comply with the agreed terms, the bank will take corrective actions. The Equator Principles are not a mere declaration of cautious banks but a full commitment of lenders. A violation of the Principles in the process of project financing, which led to an unexpected damage to the affected community, would not give rise to any specific legal remedies other than ordinary lawsuits. So it is more effective for banks to ensure consistent implementation of the Principles and to have them take responsible measures to solve social and environmental issues. Public interests have recently mounted up with respect to environmental issues on the occasion of the Supreme Court's decision (2006Du330) on the fiercely debated reclamation project at Saemangeum. The majority Justices said that the expected environmental damages like probable pollution of water and soil were not believed so serious and that the Administration should continue to implement the project seeking ways to make it more environment friendly. In this case, though the Category A Saemangeum Project was carried out by a government agency, the Supreme Court behaved itself as a signal giver to approve or stop the environment-related project like an Equator bank in project financing. At present, there is no Equator bank in Korea in contrast to three big banks in Japan. Also Korean contractors, which are aggressively bidding for Category A-type projects in South East Asia and Mideast, might find themselves in a disadvantageous position because they are generally ignorant of the environmental assessment associated with project financing. In this regard, Korean banks and overseas project contractors should care for the revised Equator Principles and the latest developments in project financing more seriously. It's because its scope has expanded to the capital cost of US$10 million or more across all industry sectors regardless of developing countries or not. It should be noted that, for a Korean bank, being an Equator bank is more or less burdensome in a short-term period, but it must be conducive to minimizing risks and building up good reputation in the long run.