• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.23 no.2
• /
• pp.173-205
• /
• 2008

Space debris have frequently caused damage to space objects like satellites in orbits and sometimes have fallen on the earth. Such increase in space debris will lead to the high possibility of threatening space activities of mankind. However, it is not so easy for the damage caused both by identified and by unidentified space debris to be recovered since in the regime of the current international law, there is no legislation of prescribing the damage done by space debris. For overcoming the limitation it seems desirable that either the Liability Convention should partly be amended or new international law regime should be established. For instance, 'space debris' should be included in the new definition of 'space object' and the range of launching should also be defined clearly by making the concept of 'launching' somewhat more specified. Moreover, the subject of international liability for damage caused by space debris should be divided into two classes: the subject before and after registration. While in case of before-registration launch states should be held liable for any damage jointly or individually, in case of after-registration 'the state of registry' or 'owner' of the space debris should be. In the event of damage being caused elsewhere than on the surface of the earth to a space object of other State, 'fault-based liability' is currently applied. But it needs to be changed into 'absolutely liability'. In this paper, 'Liability Pool', 'Insurance', 'Market-Share Liability' are presented as aid devices of the damages resulting from unidentified space debris. They should be defined through the amendment of the Liability Convention or another international treaty. Some day there comes a time when our country shall possess many of the astronomical price of satellites. It means that we can't be free from the damage by the increasing number of space debris. Provided that our satellites are damaged by such space debris, it will do the satellites damage and cause impaired functioning or troubles in operation. As a result, if we are not paid for the damage by space debris, we will be confronted with tremendous economic loss because it is necessarily connected with the excess burden of taxation. Thus, an international agreement regarding the measures of the compensation for space debris damage must be made very soon.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.21 no.1
• /
• pp.169-189
• /
• 2006

In 2007, KSLV(Korea Small Launching Vehicle) that we made at Goheung National Space Center is going to launch and promotes of our space exploration systematically and 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' was enter into force. 'Space Exploration Promotion Act' article 3, section 1, as is prescribing "Korean government keeps the space treaties contracted with other countries and international organizations and pursues after peaceful uses of outer space." The representative international treaties are Outer Space Treaty (1967) and Liability Convention (1972) etc. In Liability convention article 2, "A launching State shall be absolutely liable to pay compensation for damage caused by its space object on the surface of the earth or to aircraft in flight. The important content of the art. 2 is the responsible entity is the 'State' not the 'Company'. According by Korean Space Exploration Act art. 14, person who launches space objects according to art. 8 and art. 11 must bear the liability for damages owing to space accidents of the space objects. Could Korean government apply the Products Liability Act which is enter into force from July 1, 2002 to space launching person? And what is the contact type between Korea Aerospace Research Institute(KARl) and Russia manufacturer. Is that a Co-Development contract or Licence Product contract? And there is no exemption clause to waive the Russia manufacturer's liability which we could find it from other similar contract condition. If there is no exemption clause to the Russia manufacturer, could we apply the Korean Products Liability Act to Russia one? The most important legal point is whether we could apply the Korean Products Liability Act to the main component company. According by the art. 17 of the contract between KARl and the company, KARl already apply the Products Liability Act to the main component company. For reference, we need to examine the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, this case is that long distance electricity communication satellite of Western Union Telegraph company possessions fails on track entry. In Western Union's insurance company supplied to Western Union with insurance of $ 105 millions, which has the satellite regard as entirely damage. Five insurance companies -Appalachian insurance company, Commonwealth insurance company, Industrial Indemnity, Mutual Marine Office, Northbrook Excess & Surplus insurance company- went to court against McDonnell Douglases, Morton Thiokol and Hitco company to inquire for fault and strict liability of product. By the Appalachian Insurance co. v. McDonnell Douglas case, KARl should waiver the main component's product liability burden. And we could study the possibility of the adapt 'Government Contractor Defense' theory to the main component company.