• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.1
• /
• pp.117-149
• /
• 2015

On May 16, 2014 the Supreme Court of Korea rendered its decision with respect to litigation filed by All Nippon Airways Co., Ltd. ("ANA") for revocation of an order of correction and payment of a penalty imposed by the Korea Fair Trade Commission ("KFTC"). On or around September 2002, ANA and various airlines operating air cargo service from Japan to Korea were allegedly to have agree to introduce of fuel surcharge into their rates on cargo fares in an attempt to recoup falling profits from rising of oil price. As this hard core cartel was per se prohibited under Korean competition law (The Monopoly Regulation And Fair Trade Act), KFTC began an investigation and consequently with fruitful results imposed an amount of penalty and issued an order of prohibition. ANA protested against this imposition by filing suit against KFTC under the reasons that (1) their agreement was simply pursuant to the relevant laws and regulations including Air Transport Agreement between Korea and Japan, (2) there was an administrative guidance from Japanese government to allow this agreement, (3) extraterritorial application of Korean competition law to the agreement in this matter was improper as it was made within Japan and targeted only for the shipment from Japan to Korea: accordingly there is not a direct and serious effect between the agreement and any result of anti-competitive. This article aims to review ANA's allegation and the judgement delivered by Korean court under some issues respectively; (1) whether there is an effectively actual anti-competitive cartel between airlines including plaintiff, (2) whether filed rate doctrine is reasonable and applicable in this case for precluding wrongfulness, (3) what is the reasonable limitation of boundaries in extraterritorial application of Korean competition law. Additionally, this article also suggests to concern particular features of air transport business as an regulated industry in judging the unfair restrain on competition.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.169-195
• /
• 2020

With the increase in air transportation, air delays are inevitable, and the damage of air consumers is also increasing. In Korea, the Ministry of Land, Infrastructure and Transport announced 「the Criteria for Protection of Users of Air Transportation」, but the Criteria does not include aviation delays except Tarmac delay, but this criteria is a only public notice, not an Act. Lately, a clause about Tarmac delay was newly established as Article 61bis of the Aviation Business Act, and was enacted from May 27, 2020. The Air carriers' Tarmac delay are subject to mandatory regulations. This research showed how lawsuits were implemented for the protection of aviation consumers related to aviation delays prior to the imposition of this article. In addition, the study examined at the public law level, whether the protection rights of aviation consumers is the fundamental right under the Constitution and whether the government should be the main subjects of consumer protection. And then we studied the effect of enforcement about the Tarmac Delay Rule of the United States. This rule acts as a federal regulation. Subsequently, the Biscone case presented that it was not easy for the US court to accept a lawsuit against the passengers for tarmac delay. There are limitations in remedying the damages of airline consumers due to delays either in Korea trial or the U.S. trial. Finally it needs strengthening the penalty to secure the effectiveness of the Tarmac delay clause regulations. In order to protect airline consumers, it was proposed that the protection of aviation consumer law should be established through the revision as the Enforcement Rules of the Airline Business Act.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.3-40
• /
• 2020

The term "accident" in the Warsaw Convention of 1929 and the Montreal Convention of 1999, which govern carrier liability in international air transport, is an important criterion for determining carrier liability. However, because there is no explicit definition of the term in the treaty provisions, the term is largely subjected to the judgment and interpretation of the courts. Although there have been numerous changes in purpose and circumstance in the transition from the Warsaw regime to the conclusion of the Montreal Convention, there was no discussion on the concept of "accident" therefore, even after the adoption of the Montreal Convention, there is no doubt that the term is to be interpreted in the same manner as before. On this point, the United States Supreme Court's Air France v. Saks clarified the concept of "accident" and is still cited as an important precedent. Recently, the CJEU, in GN v. ZU, presented a new concept of "accident" introduced in the Montreal Convention: that "reference must be made to the ordinary meaning" in interpreting "accident" and that the term "covers all situations occurring on aboard an aircraft." Furthermore, the CJEU ruled that the term does not include the applicability of "hazards typically associated with aviation," which was controversial in previous cases. Such an interpretation can be reasonably seen as the court's expansion of the concept of "accident," with a focus on "protecting consumer interests," a core tenet of both the Montreal convention and the European Union Regulations(EC: No 889/2002). The CJEU's independent interpretation of "accident" is a departure from the Warsaw Convention and the Saks case, with their focus on "carrier protection," and instead focuses on the "passenger protection" standard of the Montreal Convention. Consequently, this expands both the court's discretion and the carrier's risk management liability. Such an interpretation by the CJEU can be said to be in line with the purpose of the Montreal Convention in terms of "passenger protection." However, there are problems to be considered in tandem with an expanded interpretation of "accident." First, there may be controversy concerning "balance" in that it focused on "passenger protection" in relation to the "equitable balance of interests" between air carriers and passengers, which is the basic purpose of the agreement. Second, huge losses are expected as many airlines fly to countries within the European Union. Third, there is now a gap in the interpretation of "accident" in Europe and the United States, which raises a question on the "unity of rules," another basic tenet of the Convention. Fourth, this interpretation of "accident" by the CJEU raises questions regarding its scope of application, as it only refers to the "hazards typically associated with aviation" and "situations occurring aboard an aircraft." In this case, the CJEU newly proposed a novel criterion for the interpretation of "accident" under the Montreal Convention. As this presents food for thought on the interpretation of "accident," it is necessary to pay close attention to any changes in court rulings in the future. In addition, it suggests that active measures be taken for passenger safety by recognizing air carriers' unlimited liability and conducting systematic reforms.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.35 no.2
• /
• pp.75-111
• /
• 2020

The civilian drone world has evolved in recent years from one dominated by hobbyists to growing involvement by companies seeking to profit from unmanned flight in everything from infrastructure inspections to drone deliveries that are already subject to regulations. Drone flight under the property right relation with the land owner would be deemed legal on the condition that expeditious and innocent passage of drone flight over the land be assured. The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) enshrines the concept of innocent passage through a coastal state's territorial sea. Passage is innocent so long as it is not prejudicial to the peace, good order or security of the coastal state. A vessel in innocent passage may traverse the coastal state's territorial sea continuously and expeditiously, not stopping or anchoring except in force majeure situations. However, the disturbances caused by drone flight may be removed, which is defined as infringement against the constitutional interest of personal rights. For example, aggressive infringement against privacy and personal freedom may be committed by drone more easily than ever before, and than other means. The cost-benefit analysis, however, has been recognjzed as effective criteria regarding the removal of disturbances or injunction decision. Applying that analysis, the civil action against such infringement may not find suitable basis for making a good case. Because the removal of such infringement through civil actions may result in only the deletion of journal article. The injunction of drone flight before taking the information would not be obtainable through civil action, Therefore, more detailed and meticulous regulation and criteria in public law domain may be preferable than civil action, at present time. It may be suitable for legal stability and drone industry to set up the detailed public regulations restricting the free flight of drone capable of acquiring visual information amounting to the infrigement against the right of personal information security.

• Journal of the Korean Society for Marine Environment & Energy
• /
• v.19 no.3
• /
• pp.227-235
• /
• 2016

This paper emphasized the necessity of the marine spatial planning (MSP) through the analysis of the major developmental projects which could make a contradiction based on the adequacy of the site selection and environmental impacts. The conflicting affairs between space utilization and management plan happen in the following ways: marine renewable energy development, sand mining, reclamation, construction of golf course in coastal area, thermal effluent and waste heat, erosion causing port development. The conflict of stakeholder continues caused by the accumulated environmental impact. For the reasons mentioned above, we found two things. First, it is necessary to comprehend the fact of developmental planning and MSP. Second, it is still unsatisfactory to connect the relevance of laws related to the spatial planning. For the reinforcement of marine environmental policy management, it is necessary to consolidate the property of site selection and assessment of developmental scale. Especially, while the strategic environmental assessment is in progress based on site selection and property of scale, consistent diagnosis is needed in the following concerns: the fact of the marine spatial planning, the relevance between national developmental plan and regional developmental plan, fisheries regulation, marine protected animals. For the environmentally sound and sustainable development (ESSD), MSP should have to be prepared based in a way of top-down including coastal and EEZ plan, relevance of ocean-use zoning and sector planning, 3-D spatial information. And also integrated information system have to be prepared through high-tech marine spatial information. In conclusion, consistent and relevant strategy for MSP should have to include the whole information related to the maritime affairs such as harbor, fishing port, fishing ground, coastal management, marine ecosystem generally.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.2
• /
• pp.31-67
• /
• 1990

One of the first issues which arose in the evolution of air law was the determination of the vertical limits of airspace over private property. In 1959 the UN in its Ad Hoc Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space, started to give attention to the question of the meaning of the term "outer space". Discussions in the United Nations regarding the delimitation issue were often divided between those in favour of a functional approach ("functionalists"), and those seeking the delineation of a boundary ("spatialists"). The functionalists, backed initially by both major space powers, which viewed any boundary as possibly restricting their access to space(Whether for peaceful or military purposes), won the first rounds, starting with the 1959 Report of the Ad Hoc Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space which did not consider that the topic called for priority consideration. In 1966, however, the spatialists, were able to place the issue on the agenda of the Outer Sapce Committee pursuant to Resolution 2222 (xxx1). However, the spatialists were not able to present a common position since there existed a variety of propositions for delineation of a boundary. Over the years, the funtionalists have seemed to be losing ground. 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 is therefore to be welcomed that there is clear evidence of a growing recognition of the defect inherent to such an approach and that a spatial approach to the problem is gaining support both by a growing number of States as well as by publicists. The search for a solution of the problem of demarcating the two different legal regimes governing the space above the Earth has undoubtedly been facilitated, and a number of countries, among them Argentina, Belgium, France, Italy and Mexico have already advocated the acceptance of the lower boundary of outer space at a height of 100km. The adoption of the principle of sovereignty at that height does not mean that States would not be allowed to take protective measures against space activities above that height which constitute a threat to their security. A parallel can be drawn with the defence of the State's security on the high seas. Measures taken by States in their own protection on the high seas outside the territorial waters-provided that they are proportionate to the danger-are not considered to infringe the principle of international law. The most important issue in this context relates to the problem of a right of passage for space craft through foreign air space in order to reach outer space. In the reports to former ILA Conferences an explanation was given of the reasons why no customary rule of freedom of passage for aircraft through foreign territorial air space could as yet be said to exist. It was suggested, however, that though the essential elements for the creation of a rule of customary international law allowing such passage were still lacking, developments apperaed to point to a steady growth of a feeling of necessity for such a rule. A definite treaty solution of the demarcation problem would require further study which should be carried out by the UN Outer Space Committee in close co-operation with other interested international organizations, including ICAO. If a limit between air space and outer space were established, air space would automatically come under the regime of the Chicago Convention alone. The use of the word "recognize" in Art. I of chicago convention is an acknowledgement of sovereignty over airspace existing as a general principle of law, the binding force of which exists independently of the Convention. Further it is important to note that the Aricle recognizes this sovereignty, as existing for every state, holding it immaterial whether the state is or is not a contracting state. The functional criteria having been created by reference to either the nature of activity or the nature of the space object, the next hurdle would be to provide methods of verification. With regard to the question of international verification the establishment of an International Satelite Monitoring Agency is required. The path towards the successful delimitation of outer space from territorial space is doubtless narrow and stony but the establishment of a precise legal framework, consonant with the basic principles of international law, for the future activities of states in outer space will, it is still believed, remove a source of potentially dangerous conflicts between states, and furthermore afford some safeguard of the rights and interests of non-space powers which otherwise are likely to be eroded by incipient customs based on at present almost complete freedom of action of the space powers.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.31 no.2
• /
• pp.237-269
• /
• 2016

Asia-Pacific Space Cooperation Organization (APSCO) is the only intergovernmental space cooperation organization in Asia. Since its establishment to date, eight countries have signed the convention and become member states. South Korea participated actively in the preparatory phase of creating the organization, and one conference organized by AP-MCSTA which is the predecessor of APSCO was held in South Korea. However, after the APSCO Convention was opened for signature in 2005 to date, South Korea does not ratify the Convention and become a member. The rapid development of space commercialization and privatization, as well as the fastest growing commercial space market in Asia, provides opportunities for Asian countries to cooperate with each other in relevant space fields. And to participate in the existing cooperation framework (e.g., the APSCO) by the Asian space countries (e.g., South Korea) could be a proper choice. Even if the essential cooperation in particular space fields is challenging, joint space programs among different Asian countries for dealing with the common events can be initiated at the first steps. Since APSCO has learned the successful legal arrangements from ESA, the legal measures established by its Convention are believed to be qualified to ensure the achievement of benefits of different member states. For example, the regulation of the "fair return" principle confirms that the return of interests from the relevant programs is in proportion to the member's investment in the programs. Moreover, the distinguish of basic and optional activities intends to authorize the freedom of the members to choose programs to participate. And for the voting procedure, the acceptance of the "consensus" by the Council is in favor of protecting the member's interest when making decisions. However, political factors that are potential to block the participation of South Korea in APSCO are difficult to be ignored. A recent event is an announcement of deploying THAAD by South Korea, which causes tension between South Korea and China. The cooperation between these two states in space activities will be influenced. A long-standing barrier is that China acts as a non-member of the main international export control mechanism, i.e., the MTCR. The U.S takes this fact as the main reason to prevent South Korea to cooperate with China in developing space programs. Although the political factors that will block the participation of South Korea in APSCO are not easy to removed shortly, legal measures can be taken to reduce the political influence. More specifically, APSCO is recommended to ensure the achievement of commercial interests of different cooperation programs by regulating precisely the implementation of the "fair return" principle. Furthermore, APSCO is also suggested to contribute to managing the common regional events by sharing satellite data. And it is anticipated that these measures can effectively response the requirements of the rapid development of space commercialization and the increasing common needs of Asia, thereby to provide a platform for the further cooperation. In addition, in order to directly reduce the political influence, two legal measures are necessary to be taken: Firstly, to clarify the rights and responsibilities of the host state (i.e., China) as providing assistance, coordination and services to the management of the Organization to release the worries of the other member states that the host state will control the Organization's activities. And secondly, to illustrate that the cooperation in APSCO is for the non-military purpose (a narrow sense of "peaceful purpose") to reduce the political concerns. Regional cooperation in Asia regarding space affairs is considered to be a general trend in the future, so if the participation of South Korea in APSCO can be finally proved to be feasible, there will be an opportunity to discuss the creation of a comprehensive institutionalized framework for space cooperation in Asia.

• Journal of the Korean Institute of Landscape Architecture
• /
• v.39 no.6
• /
• pp.86-97
• /
• 2011

This study analyzed the necessity of the tentatively-named "Framework Act on Landscape Architecture" as an umbrella law in the field of landscape architecture regarding legal, industrial, and academic aspects and is intended to provide basic data to suggest the optimal legal system and legislative proceedings to control it. This study can be summarized as follows: First, a form of framework act on landscape architecture is appropriate for a compromise between ideal type and political framework. Some content is suitable for proclamatory character including present and future issue related to the landscape architecture fields. Second, legislative proceedings are more reasonable as motions coming from assembly proposals rather than government. Motions by assembly proposal recommend the following procedure: submission of a legislative bill by an assemblyperson, passing of a permanent commission, review by government, leading approval by emphasis on correspondence with the principle to carry out government affairs, proclamation. Third, a frame based on content and form can be made up of a total of 7 chapters 34 articles. The function must include the following: the suggestion of direction for government policy, the systematization of the institution and what it includes, the control of government administration, a public service system regarding public relations for landscape architecture and so on. The results of this study will form a social consensus about the necessity of a framework act regarding landscape architecture fields and contribute to informing the importance of landscape architecture as related to other industrial fields.

• Korean Security Journal
• /
• no.11
• /
• pp.203-226
• /
• 2006

A highly sophisticated expertise and systematic and integrated management of security operation are essential for a crowded stadium. a special object of security guarding. Nonetheless, the recent incident in a singing concert hall reveals the overall problem like the lacking safety management system. lacking deployment of professional security personnel, absence of safety manuals and safety measures, as well as the lack of professionalism of private sector security companies. In this study, we presented three categories that needed improvement, like the legal and institutional improvement, improvement of policy and improvement of operation which are required to set up the model to operate the optimal private sector security duties. For the revision of law and institution for a better and more desirable method, we discussed the revision of related laws and regulations pursuant to the security operation at places where events are held, including the revision of law on security guarding work, regulation on common housing management, uniformity of security guarding, and law on performance. For the improvement of policies, we discussed the introduction of security consultants, strengthening the security instructor system, expansion of relevant organizations, establishment of mutual cooperation, privatization of profitable events, improvement of awareness about the security activities provided by private sector, policy for the professionalism of private security operation, expansion of security exhibition and seminar. For the improvement of operation. we discussed professional security techniques. such as the technique of security consulting, the application of CPTED technique, the technique for the integration of system, the method of operation, the establishment of a system to support public security operations and volunteers, establishment of a manual for security guarding performance, modernization and high tech-oriented equipment, organization of security guarding entity in which the industry, academic society and government participates together.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.33 no.1
• /
• pp.175-204
• /
• 2018

Recently, the aviation leisure business has been legislated, and related industries have become active base with increasing the light sports aircraft within the legislation system. However, in the light sports aircraft safety problem, it is often mentioned that the flight is in violation of the regulations, the lack of safety consciousness of the operator and lack of ability, and the personal operators have a risk of accident of light aircraft such as insufficient safety management and poor maintenance. At present, the maintenance of light sports aircraft is carried out by the A & P mechanic in accordance with the relevant laws and regulations, but it is difficult to say that it is equipped with qualification and expertise. It is not a legal issue to undertake light sports aircraft maintenance work on the regulation system. However, the problem of reliability and appropriateness is constantly being raised because airplanes, light sports aircraft, and ultra-light vehicle are classified and serviced in a legal method. Although legal and institutional frameworks for light sports aircraft are separated, much of it is stipulated in the aviation law provisions. Light sports aircraft maintenance work also follows the current aircraft maintenance system. In the United States, Europe, and Australia where General Aviation developed, legal and institutional devices related to maintenance of light aircraft were introduced, and specialized maintenance tasks are covered in the light aircraft mechanics system. As a result of analysis of domestic and foreign laws and regulations, it is necessary to introduce the qualification system for maintenance of light aircraft. In advanced aviation countries such as the United States, Europe, and Australia, a light sports aircraft repairman system is installed to perform safety management. This is to cope with changes in the operating environment of the new light sports aircraft. This study does not suggest the need for a light aircraft repairman system. From the viewpoint of the legal system, the examination of the relevant laws and regulations revealed that the supplementary part of the system is necessary. It is also require that the necessity of introduction is raised in comparison with overseas cases. Based on these results, it is necessary to introduce the system into the light aircraft repairman system, and suggestions for how to improve it are suggested.