• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제35권2호
• /
• pp.375-402
• /
• 2020

등록협약의 채택과 발효는 우주법(corpus iuris spatialis)을 발전시키고 강화하는 또 다른 성과였다. 등록협약은 UNCOPUOS 회원국이 제정한 4번째 조약으로 우주조약 제5조와 제8조를 좀 더 상세하게 설명한 조약이다. 등록협약은 또한 국제협력을 촉진하기 위해 유엔사무총장에게 우주활동의 성격, 행동, 위치 및 결과를 알리는 의무를 규정하고 있는 우주조약 제11조를 보완하고 강화한 조약이다. 등록협약의 일반적인 목적은 우주조약 제8조에 언급된 바와 같이 "관할권과 통제"를 명확하게 하기 위한 것이다. 우선적으로 우주물체의 등록이라는 목표 외에도 등록협약은 평화로운 목적을 위해 우주공간의 탐사 및 이용과 증진에 기여하고 있다. 우주물체의 공개기록을 설정하면 미확인 우주물체가 존재할 가능성이 줄어들어 대량살상무기를 비밀리에 우주궤도에 올리는 등의 위험성이 줄어들게 된다. 또한 좀 더 나은 우주교통관리에도 도움이 될 수 있다. 등록협약은 우주조약 제5조 상 우주비행사의 구조 및 송환문제를 보다 구체적으로 이행하기 위해 설립된 조약이다. 이와 관련하여 두 법이 상충되는 경우 우주조약은 일반법으로, 등록협약은 특별법으로 간주되어, "특별법우선의 원칙"이 적용된다. 등록협약에 가입하지 않은 국가는 1961년 유엔 총회 결의 1721(XVI)의 선언 7 항 등록에 관한 규칙을 따라야 한다. 유엔 결의 1721 (XVI)은 본질적으로 구속력은 없지만 모든 국가가 우주공간에 우주물체를 발사할 경우 유엔에 등록하기 위하여 발사에 관한 정보를 즉시 제공하도록 요구하는 표준으로 국제관습법으로 발전한 것으로 볼 수 있다. 그러나, 제공될 정보의 본질과 범위는 통지국의 재량에 달려있다. 등록협약도 국가들로 하여금 우주공간에 우주물체를 발사할 때 이를 강제적으로 등록시키기 위해 만들어진 조약이지만, 실제로는 자발적 등록을 기반으로 하기 때문에 기존관행에서 벗어나지 못한 조약이다. 현재 우주의 상업화로 인해 새로운 문제들이 제기되는 상황에서, 우주물체를 구매한 새로운 국가가 등록은 어떻게 해야 하는지 또는 발사된 우주물체가 기능이 정지되어 그로 인해 우주폐기물 문제가 발생할 때 등록국이 계속해서 책임을 지는 가 등 여러 문제들이 등록협약의 개정, 또는 추가 의정서 또는 새로운 등록협약이 수립될 때 중요한 주제로 간주되어야 할 것이다. 또한 짧은 시간 동안 준 궤도를 여행하는 우주차량의 경우 이것도 등록해야 하는 문제도 함께 고려되어야 할 것이다.

• 항공우주정책ㆍ법학회지
• /
• 제31권1호
• /
• pp.145-167
• /
• 2016

안전보장이사회는 국제연합헌장 제7장 제39조에 따라 평화에 대한 위협, 평화의 파괴 또는 침략행위의 존재를 결정할 권한을 갖고 있으며, 이에 안보리 결의가 헌장 제7장에 따름을 명시하는 경우 그 결의가 그러한 안보리의 결정을 확정하는 문서를 구성한다. 또한 헌장 제25조에 따라서 회원국은 안보리 결정을 수락하고 이행하여야 할 의무를 부담하므로, 안보리 결정을 확정하는 그러한 안보리 결의의 회원국에 대한 법적 구속력이 인정된다고 해석된다. 안보리 결의를 용어의 선택 관점에서 살펴 보면, 탄도미사일 프로그램 관련 활동을 중지(suspend)하는 것에 대해서는 결정(decide)이고, 탄도미사일을 발사하지 않을 것에 대해서는 요청(demand), 그리고 미사일실험유예조치로의 복귀에 대해서는 요청(demand)이라는 점이 주목된다. 안보리의 수차례의 결의에서 탄도미사일에 관련된 모든 활동의 중지를 결정하는 조항과 탄도미사일 기술을 이용하는 모든 발사의 금지를 촉구하는 조항 및 그 촉구를 결정으로 보는 조항은 1967년 우주조약에 규정되지 않은 평화적 목적의 내용을 정하는 성격을 갖거나 또는 위와 마찬가지로 특정 경우에만 적용되는 안보리의 결정이다. 다른 한편으로는 발사금지를 결정하는 안보리결의는 북한에 대한 제재에 한정된다고 볼 수 있다. 학설상 WMD에 관련된 안보리의 결의도 결정(decide)라는 용어를 택하고 있어서 구속력 있는 의무를 부과하는 것으로 인정되지만, 법의 제정에는 못미치고 단순한 제재의 결정에 그친다고 보기도 한다. 국제평화에 대한 위협의 존재를 결정하고 그에 대한 제재를 내용으로 하는 안보리 결정을 둘러싸고, 그 결정에 이르는 국가간 합의의 방식이 과연 국제법상의 입법에 이를 정도인가에 대한 의문이 북한의 발사체 발사에 대한 결정에 있어서도 제기된다고 판단된다. 또한, 우주공간과 그 공간에서 국가들의 우주활동을 규율의 객체로 하면서, 모든 국가의 보편적인 권리와 의무를 규율함을 목적으로 하는 우주법의 성격상 안보리 이사국들의 합의에 따르는 안보리의 결정이 우주법의 특별법으로서의 지위를 갖는다고 판단하기는 어렵다. 이에 안보리 결의는 우주법의 내용을 구체화하는 입법이 아니라 북한에 대한 제재에 한정된다고 판단된다.

• 안보군사학연구
• /
• 통권8호
• /
• pp.49-168
• /
• 2010

Just before the Korean War, the total number of the North Korean troops was 198,380, while that of the ROK(Republic of Korea) army troops 105,752. That is, the total number of the ROK army troops at that time was 53.3% of the total number of the North Korean army. As of December 2008, the total number of the North Korean troops is estimated to be 1,190,000, while that of the ROK troops is 655,000, so the ROK army maintains 55.04% of the total number of the North Korean troops. If the ROK army continues to reduce its troops according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the total number of its troops will be 517,000 m 2020. If North Korea maintains the current status(l,190,000 troops), the number of the ROK troops will be 43.4% of the North Korean army. In terms of units, just before the Korean War, the number of the ROK army divisions and regiments was 80% and 44.8% of North Korean army. As of December 2008, North Korea maintains 86 divisions and 69 regiments. Compared to the North Korean army, the ROK army maintains 46 Divisions (53.4% of North Korean army) and 15 regiments (21.3% of North Korean army). If the ROK army continue to reduce the military units according to [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of ROK army divisions will be 28(13 Active Division, 4 Mobilization Divisions and 11 Local Reserve Divisions), while that of the North Korean army will be 86 in 2020. In that case, the number of divisions of the ROK army will be 32.5% of North Korean army. During the Korean war, North Korea suddenly invaded the Republic of Korea and occupied its capital 3 days after the war began. At that time, the ROK army maintained 80% of army divisions, compared to the North Korean army. The lesson to be learned from this is that, if the ROK army is forced to disperse its divisions because of the simultaneous invasion of North Korea and attack of guerrillas in home front areas, the Republic of Korea can be in a serious military danger, even though it maintains 80% of military divisions of North Korea. If the ROK army promotes the plans in [Military Reform Plan 2020], the number of military units of the ROK army will be 32.5% of that of the North Korean army. This ratio is 2.4 times lower than that of the time when the Korean war began, and in this case, 90% of total military power should be placed in the DMZ area. If 90% of military power is placed in the DMZ area, few troops will be left for the defense of home front. In addition, if the ROK army continues to reduce the troops, it can allow North Korea to have asymmetrical superiority in military force and it will eventually exert negative influence on the stability and peace of the Korean peninsular. On the other hand, it should be reminded that, during the Korean War, the Republic of Korea was attacked by North Korea, though it kept 53.3% of troops, compared to North Korea. It should also be reminded that, as of 2008, the ROK army is defending its territory with the troops 55.04% of North Korea. Moreover, the national defense is assisted by 25,120 troops of the US Forces in Korea. In case the total number of the ROK troops falls below 43.4% of the North Korean army, it may cause social unrest about the national security and may lead North Korea's misjudgement. Besides, according to Lanchester strategy, the party with weaker military power (60% compared to the party with stronger military power) has the 4.1% of winning possibility. Therefore, if we consider the fact that the total number of the ROK army troops is 55.04% of that of the North Korean army, the winning possibility of the ROK army is not higher than 4.1%. If the total number of ROK troops is reduced to 43.4% of that of North Korea, the winning possibility will be lower and the military operations will be in critically difficult situation. [Military Reform Plan 2020] rums at the reduction of troops and units of the ground forces under the policy of 'select few'. However, the problem is that the financial support to achieve this goal is not secured. Therefore, the promotion of [Military Reform Plan 2020] may cause the weakening of military defence power in 2020. Some advanced countries such as Japan, UK, Germany, and France have promoted the policy of 'select few'. However, what is to be noted is that the national security situation of those countries is much different from that of Korea. With the collapse of the Soviet Unions and European communist countries, the military threat of those European advanced countries has almost disappeared. In addition, the threats those advanced countries are facing are not wars in national level, but terrorism in international level. To cope with the threats like terrorism, large scaled army trops would not be necessary. So those advanced European countries can promote the policy of 'select few'. In line with this, those European countries put their focuses on the development of military sections that deal with non-military operations and protection from unspecified enemies. That is, those countries are promoting the policy of 'select few', because they found that the policy is suitable for their national security environment. Moreover, since they are pursuing common interest under the European Union(EU) and they can form an allied force under NATO, it is natural that they are pursing the 'select few' policy. At present, NATO maintains the larger number of troops(2,446,000) than Russia(l,027,000) to prepare for the potential threat of Russia. The situation of japan is also much different from that of Korea. As a country composed of islands, its prime military focus is put on the maritime defense. Accordingly, the development of ground force is given secondary focus. The japanese government promotes the policy to develop technology-concentrated small size navy and air-forces, instead of maintaining large-scaled ground force. In addition, because of the 'Peace Constitution' that was enacted just after the end of World War II, japan cannot maintain troops more than 240,000. With the limited number of troops (240,000), japan has no choice but to promote the policy of 'select few'. However, the situation of Korea is much different from the situations of those countries. The Republic of Korea is facing the threat of the North Korean Army that aims at keeping a large-scale military force. In addition, the countries surrounding Korea are also super powers containing strong military forces. Therefore, to cope with the actual threat of present and unspecified threat of future, the importance of maintaining a carefully calculated large-scale military force cannot be denied. Furthermore, when considering the fact that Korea is in a peninsular, the Republic of Korea must take it into consideration the tradition of continental countries' to maintain large-scale military powers. Since the Korean War, the ROK army has developed the technology-force combined military system, maintaining proper number of troops and units and pursuing 'select few' policy at the same time. This has been promoted with the consideration of military situation in the Koran peninsular and the cooperation of ROK-US combined forces. This kind of unique military system that cannot be found in other countries can be said to be an insightful one for the preparation for the actual threat of North Korea and the conflicts between continental countries and maritime countries. In addition, this kind of technology-force combined military system has enabled us to keep peace in Korea. Therefore, it would be desirable to maintain this technology-force combined military system until the reunification of the Korean peninsular. Furthermore, it is to be pointed out that blindly following the 'select few' policy of advanced countries is not a good option, because it is ignoring the military strategic situation of the Korean peninsular. If the Republic of Korea pursues the reduction of troops and units radically without consideration of the threat of North Korea and surrounding countries, it could be a significant strategic mistake. In addition, the ROK army should keep an eye on the fact the European advanced countries and Japan that are not facing direct military threats are spending more defense expenditures than Korea. If the ROK army reduces military power without proper alternatives, it would exert a negative effect on the stable economic development of Korea and peaceful reunification of the Korean peninsular. Therefore, the desirable option would be to focus on the development of quality of forces, maintaining proper size and number of troops and units under the technology-force combined military system. The tableau above shows that the advanced countries like the UK, Germany, Italy, and Austria spend more defense expenditure per person than the Republic of Korea, although they do not face actual military threats, and that they keep achieving better economic progress than the countries that spend less defense expenditure. Therefore, it would be necessary to adopt the merits of the defense systems of those advanced countries. As we have examined, it would be desirable to maintain the current size and number of troops and units, to promote 'select few' policy with increased defense expenditure, and to strengthen the technology-force combined military system. On the basis of firm national security, the Republic of Korea can develop efficient policies for reunification and prosperity, and jump into the status of advanced countries. Therefore, the plans to reduce troops and units in [Military Reform Plan 2020] should be reexamined. If it is difficult for the ROK army to maintain its size of 655,000 troops because of low birth rate, the plans to establish the prompt mobilization force or to adopt drafting system should be considered for the maintenance of proper number of troops and units. From now on, the Republic of Korean government should develop plans to keep peace as well as to prepare unexpected changes in the Korean peninsular. For the achievement of these missions, some options can be considered. The first one is to maintain the same size of military troops and units as North Korea. The second one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea in terms of military force index. The third one is to maintain the same level of military power as North Korea, with the combination of the prompt mobilization force and the troops in active service under the system of technology-force combined military system. At present, it would be not possible for the ROK army to maintain such a large-size military force as North Korea (1,190,000 troops and 86 units). So it would be rational to maintain almost the same level of military force as North Korea with the combination of the troops on the active list and the prompt mobilization forces. In other words, with the combination of the troops in active service (60%) and the prompt mobilization force (40%), the ROK army should develop the strategies to harmonize technology and forces. The Korean government should also be prepared for the strategic flexibility of USFK, the possibility of American policy change about the location of foreign army, radical unexpected changes in North Korea, the emergence of potential threat, surrounding countries' demand for Korean force for the maintenance of regional stability, and demand for international cooperation against terrorism. For this, it is necessary to develop new approaches toward the proper number and size of troops and units. For instance, to prepare for radical unexpected political or military changes in North Korea, the Republic of Korea should have plans to protect a large number of refugees, to control arms and people, to maintain social security, and to keep orders in North Korea. From the experiences of other countries, it is estimated that 115,000 to 230,000 troops, plus ten thousands of police are required to stabilize the North Korean society, in the case radical unexpected military or political change happens in North Korea. In addition, if the Republic of Korea should perform the release of hostages, control of mass destruction weapons, and suppress the internal wars in North Korea, it should send 460,000 troops to North Korea. Moreover, if the Republic of Korea wants to stop the attack of North Korea and flow of refugees in DMZ area, at least 600,000 troops would be required. In sum, even if the ROK army maintains 600,000 troops, it may need additional 460,000 troops to prepare for unexpected radical changes in North Korea. For this, it is necessary to establish the prompt mobilization force whose size and number are almost the same as the troops in active service. In case the ROK army keeps 650,000 troops, the proper number of the prompt mobilization force would be 460,000 to 500,000.