• 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.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.24 no.1
• /
• pp.119-152
• /
• 2009

Korea now has a rapidly expanding and developing space programme with exploration aspirations. The government is giving priority to the aerospace industry and, to put it on a better footing, enacted an Aerospace Industry Development Promotion Act in I987, a Space Development Promotion Act in 2005 and a Space Compensation for Damage Act in 2007. I would like to describe briefly the legislative history, main contents and comment for these three space acts including especially launch licensing, registration of space objects, use of satellite information, astronaut rescue, liability for compensation, third party liability insurance and establishment of committee and plans to assist the Korean space effort. Furthermore author proposed to legislate a new draft for the establishment of a Korean Aerospace Development Agency (KADA: tentative title) to create a similar body to Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency (JAXA), British National Space Centre (BNSC) of UK, French Centre National d'Etudes Spatiales (CNES), German Aerospace Center (DLR), Swedish Space Corporation (SSC), China Aerospace Science and Industry Corporation (CASIC), Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) as well as the Korean Space Agency (KSA: Tentative title) to create a similar body to Canadian Space Agency, European Space Agency, Russian Space Agency, Italian Space Agency, Israel Space Agency, Indian Department of Space, National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) of USA, China National Space Administration in order to develope efficiently space industry. If the Korean government will be establish the Korean Space Agency as an governmental organization in future, it is necessary to revise the contents of the Government Organization Act. It is desirable and necessary for us to establish an Asian Space Agency (ASA), in order to develop our space industry and to promote research cooperation among Asian countries, based on oriental idea and creative powers.

• Journal of the Korean earth science society
• /
• v.43 no.5
• /
• pp.591-603
• /
• 2022

The color and optical properties of seawater are determined by the interaction between dissolved organic and inorganic substances and plankton contained in it. The Ieodo - Ocean Research Institute (I-ORS), located in the East China Sea, is affected by the low salinity of the Yangtze River in the west and the Tsushima Warm Current in the south. Thus, it is a suitable site for analyzing the fluctuations in circulation and optical properties around the Korean Peninsula. In this study, seawater surrounding the I-ORS was classified according to its optical characteristics using the satellite remote reflectance observed with Moderate Resolution Imaging Spectroradiometer (MODIS)/Aqua and National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) bio-Optical Marine Algorithm Dataset (NOMAD) from January 2016 to December 2020. Additionally, the variation characteristics of optical water types (OWTs) from different seasons were presented. A total of 59,532 satellite match-up data (d ≤ 10 km) collected from seawater surrounding the I-ORS were classified into 23 types using the spectral angle mapper. The OWTs appearing in relatively clear waters surrounding the I-ORS were observed to be greater than 50% of the total. The maximum OWTs frequency in summer and winter was opposite according to season. In particular, the OWTs corresponding to optically clear seawater were primarily present in the summer. However, the same OWTs were lower than overall 1% rate in winter. Considering the OWTs fluctuations in the East China Sea, the I-ORS is inferred to be located in the transition zone of seawater. This study contributes in understanding the optical characteristics of seawater and improving the accuracy of satellite ocean color variables.

• The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy
• /
• v.30 no.2
• /
• pp.37-81
• /
• 2015

AirAsia QZ8501 Jet departed from Juanda International Airport in, Surabaya, Indonesia at 05:35 on Dec. 28, 2014 and was scheduled to arrive at Changi International Airport in Singapore at 08:30 the same day. The aircraft, an Airbus A320-200 crashed into the Java Sea on Dec. 28, 2014 carrying 162 passengers and crew off the coast of Indonesia's second largest city Surabaya on its way to Singapore. Indonesia's AirAsia jet carrying 162 people lost contact with ground control on Dec. 28, 2014. The aircraft's debris was found about 66 miles from the plane's last detected position. The 155 passengers and seven crew members aboard Flight QZ 8501, which vanished from radar 42 minutes after having departed Indonesia's second largest city of Surabaya bound for Singapore early Dec. 28, 2014. AirAsia QZ8501 had on board 137 adult passengers, 17 children and one infant, along with two pilots and five crew members in the aircraft, a majority of them Indonesian nationals. On board Flight QZ8501 were 155 Indonesian, three South Koreans, and one person each from Singapore, Malaysia and the UK. The Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 departed from Kuala Lumpur International Airport on March 8, 2014 at 00:41 local time and was scheduled to land at Beijing's Capital International Airport at 06:30 local time. Malaysia Airlines also marketed as China Southern Airlines Flight 748 (CZ748) through a code-share agreement, was a scheduled international passenger flight that disappeared on 8 March 2014 en route from Kuala Lumpur International Airport to Beijing's Capital International Airport (a distance of 2,743 miles: 4,414 km). The aircraft, a Boeing 777-200ER, last made contact with air traffic control less than an hour after takeoff. Operated by Malaysia Airlines (MAS), the aircraft carried 12 crew members and 227 passengers from 15 nations. There were 227 passengers, including 153 Chinese and 38 Malaysians, according to records. Nearly two-thirds of the passengers on Flight 370 were from China. On April 5, 2014 what could be the wreckage of the ill-fated Malaysia Airlines was found. What appeared to be the remnants of flight MH370 have been spotted drifting in a remote section of the Indian Ocean. Compensation for loss of life is vastly different between US. passengers and non-U.S. passengers. "If the claim is brought in the US. court, it's of significantly more value than if it's brought into any other court." Some victims and survivors of the Indonesian and Malaysia airline's air crash case would like to sue the lawsuit to the United States court in order to receive a larger compensation package for damage caused by an accident that occurred in the sea of Java sea and the Indian ocean and rather than taking it to the Indonesian or Malaysian court. Though each victim and survivor of the Indonesian and Malaysia airline's air crash case will receive an unconditional 113,100 Unit of Account (SDR) as an amount of compensation for damage from Indonesia's AirAsia and Malaysia Airlines in accordance with Article 21, 1 (absolute, strict, no-fault liability system) of the 1999 Montreal Convention. But if Indonesia AirAsia airlines and Malaysia Airlines cannot prove as to the following two points without fault based on Article 21, 2 (presumed faulty system) of the 1999 Montreal Convention, AirAsia of Indonesiaand Malaysia Airlines will be burdened the unlimited liability to the each victim and survivor of the Indonesian and Malaysia airline's air crash case such as (1) such damage was not due to the negligence or other wrongful act or omission of the air carrier or its servants or agents, or (2) such damage was solely due to the negligence or other wrongful act or omission of a third party. In this researcher's view for the aforementioned reasons, and under the laws of China, Indonesia, Malaysia and Korea the Chinese, Indonesian, Malaysia and Korean, some victims and survivors of the crash of the two flights are entitled to receive possibly from more than 113,100 SDR to 5 million US$ from the two airlines or from the Aviation Insurance Company based on decision of the American court. It could also be argued that it is reasonable and necessary to revise the clause referring to bodily injury to a clause mentioning personal injury based on Article 17 of the 1999 Montreal Convention so as to be included the mental injury and condolence in the near future.