• Convergence Security Journal
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.133-141
• /
• 2013

After Presidential Declaration of Korea's Rights in the Surrounding Seas(Lee, Seung-Man Line), Japanese government objected to the Korean government's Declaration of the Peace Line. Japan didn't agree with Korean's ownership of Dokdo and has tried to develop the Dokdo issue into an international dispute and solved it by resorting the International Court of Justice(ICJ) since 1954. As mentioned before, ICJ doesn'thave the right of compulsory jurisdiction of ownership of Dokdo between Korea and Japan. Therefore, we don'thave to agree with Japan's suggestion of bringing a case to ICJ to solve the Dokdo issue. It is not the best way to maintain the international peace judging by ICJ as well. When Japan try to institute case unilaterally, We should remember that it is possible to give the expanding jurisdiction to the ICJ. It is the best way that solving the dispute of Dokdo is to establish the sovereignty over Dokdo while strengthen the control the Dokdo effectively. In conclusion, no matter how Japan claims ownership of Dokdo, it cannot be subject to negotiation.

• Korea Trade Review
• /
• v.44 no.2
• /
• pp.95-107
• /
• 2019

The ICSID arbitral tribunal shall determine the suitability of investors in accordance with the Article 25 of the ICSID convention and the investment or investor's provisions under the BIT. The eligibility of investors has an important role in establishing jurisdiction under international investment disputes. Therefore, this study draws implications on issues related to investor qualification, focusing on ICSID arbitration. The investor's nationality shall be taken into consideration in determining whether the investor is eligible. The criteria for determining the nationality of a corporate investor include the place of incorporation, main business location, and substantial ownership or control. The criterion of the place of incorporation that is used in a number of BIT have the problem of protecting investors from third countries not involved in the BIT. So, in recent years it is stipulated that the actual economic activity or the main business location as well as the place of incorporation criteria. And this problem is complemented by the denial of benefit clause. When determining whether a local corporation is controlled by foreigner in the host state it considers the shareholding rate, voting rights, and the exercise of managerial rights. There is a tendency to recognize shareholder's right to petition. Thus the same damage should not cause problems such as duplicate repayment or double reimbursement between the shareholders and the company. Unexpected problems can arise if the scope of investments and investors is broadly specified in the BIT. Therefore, it is necessary to clarify the scope of investment to be protected.

• Maritime Security
• /
• v.3 no.1
• /
• pp.1-44
• /
• 2021

China's new Maritime Policy Law (MPL) purports to regulate the duties of China's maritime police agencies, including the China Coast Guard, and safeguard China's sovereignty, security, and rights and interest. The MPL has potentially far-reaching application, as China claims extensive maritime areas off its mainland and in the South China Sea. This expansive application of maritime law enforcement jurisdiction is problematic given that most of China's maritime claims are inconsistent with international law. To the extent that the MPL purports to assert jurisdiction over foreign flagged vessels in disputed areas or on the high seas, it contravenes international law. Numerous provisions of the MPL regarding the use of force are also inconsistent with international rules and standards governing the use of maritime law enforcement jurisdiction, as well as the UN Charter's prohibition on the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state. China could use the MPL as a subterfuge to advance its illegal territorial and maritime claims in the South and East China Seas and interfere with coastal State resource rights in their respective exclusive economic zone.

• Journal of Fisheries and Marine Sciences Education
• /
• v.26 no.4
• /
• pp.769-788
• /
• 2014

Today, all the countries of the world newly recognize importance of sea on 70% area of the earth, which are focused on efforts for security of marine territory and fishes resources. On the security concerns of the ocean & fishes resources, Sea are very important on the ground of the importance of the ocean, thus international community has been trying to combat a maritime security threat and illegal fisheries. Coastal states need to have proper state's jurisdiction and exercise it's jurisdiction to response effectively to a maritime security threat and illegal fisheries. Here, many of the coastal states strengthened the rights in Exclusive Economic Zone(;EEZ) naturally, there are made cooperation activities and keen competition in the sea because deepening of complex understanding of the relationship between the surrounding countries with marine surveys & continental shelf development, island territorial sovereignty & marine jurisdiction in overlap of sea area on EEZ. In these circumstances, foreign fishing boats invaded to our territorial waters and EEZ many times. in addition, Chinese fishing boats are going to illegal fisheries naturally. On this point, a powerful crackdown of maritime enforcement organization had no effect on them. Also more and more their resistance gathered strength and tendency of a illegal activities became systematization, group action and atrocity little by little. So this thesis includes a study on the regal regulation, the system and formalities on the control of illegal fishing. And the author analyzed the details of the activities of illegal fishing and boats controlled by Korea Coast Guard(KCG), fishing patrol vessels of Ministry of Maritime Affaires and Fisheries(MOMAF) and Navy etc. from in adjacent sea area of Korea. In relation to this, the policy and activity plan were devised to crackdown to illegal fisheries of foreign fishing boats and then it was enforced every year. According to this, analyze the present conditions of illegal fisheries of a foreign fishing boats on this study, also analyze the present conditions of maritime enforcement organization & found out problems to compared it. protect the territorial waters, at the same time protection of marine mineral resources & fishes resources of EEZ including continental shelf, which has want to study for the role & response of maritime enforcement organization for the protection of fisheries resources and a proper, a realistic confrontation plan of maritime enforcement organization against illegal fisheries of foreign fishing boats.

• Journal of Engineering Education Research
• /
• v.12 no.2
• /
• pp.24-35
• /
• 2009

This study was conducted to establish a principle on the fields of National Technical Qualification(NTQ), and aimed at developing criteria on requirements of the qualification that will be managed as the national technical qualification. In order to achieve the objective of the study, we examined the directions of setting the Jurisdiction of national technical qualification through role assignment between the state and private sectors. Also, we reviewed related documents, conducted Delphi survey, consulted the expert group and had an interview session for this study. There are five criteria of the jurisdiction of NTQ presented as follows. First is the field which disturbs social orders or has possibility of harming the good public morals; second, the field that requires high standards of ethics or is directly linked to life, health and safety of the public; third, the field which requires national attention for training of manpower as it is an area that is difficult for private sector to approach or it requires national management; fourth, the field which requires repair or maintenance of resources of traditional culture but is difficult for the private sector to have an access to and fifth, the field where it needs to protect the interest of the nation in the inter-nation relationships. The concrete and detailed standard on the five criteria is also presented in the study.

• Journal of Arbitration Studies
• /
• v.13 no.2
• /
• pp.47-68
• /
• 2004

The problems on application for custody in CIETAC Arbitration Rule are examined in this paper. First, The issue of jurisdiction for application for custody is arisen from the expansion of material jurisdiction of CIETAC. Until 1998, CIETAC had a jurisdiction only for the cases involving foreigners, but now, it has a jurisdiction not only for the cases involving foreigners but also for domestic cases. In the cases of arbitrating disputes involving foreigners, if the parties concerned apply for the preservation of property, CITEAC shall forward the application to and obtain a ruling from an intermediate people's court in the place where the object of the application resides, or where the property is located. But in the cases of arbitrating domestic disputes, if the parties concerned apply for the preservation of property, CITEAC shall forward the application to and obtain a ruling from an ground-level people's court in the place where the object of the application resides, or where the property is located. Therefore, "People's court" in article 23 of CIETAC Arbitration Rule includes both intermediate people's court and ground-level people's court in its meaning. Second, in the cases that the party concerned submits arbitration to CIETAC, it is not permitted for the party to ask the people's court for custody of property before submitting an arbitration. But there still can be the urgent cases that interests of the party concerned are at stake, and legitimate rights and interests of the party concerned may be damaged beyond remedy, if no application for custody of property is filed immediately. In that cases, even if the party may apply for custody of property with the people's court after submitting an arbitration, it might be too late to preserve property. Therefore, Chinese laws and rules have to be revised so that the party may ask the people's court for custody of property before submitting an arbitration. When revising laws and rules, according to the today's legislation trends, it must be considered that court and arbitration tribunal both have a right to decide the custody of property. When arbitration tribunal decides it, the procedural provisions executing it must be provided. It is also required that China permit to apply preservation of evidence as well as custody of property before submitting an arbitration. It is also strongly recommended that China permit custody of property or preservation of evidence even in the cases that an arbitration is submitted to the arbitration institute which is located in foreign country, not in China.

• Journal of Navigation and Port Research
• /
• v.39 no.4
• /
• pp.313-318
• /
• 2015

A question has recently been raised as to whether a foreign officer needs to obtain a Korean endorsement in order to be able to serve on board a Korean flag ship. This is attributable to the fact that differences of viewpoint may arise as to the interpretation on the relation between the mutatis mutandis article 24(1) and the endorsement issuance article 10 bis. This study intends to propose an interpretative solution through conducting in-depth analysis on the article 25(1). The conclusions of this study can be given as follows. First, the jurisdiction over the bareboat charter ships with hire purchase shall be rested with the third country of which the flag the ship is flying, the endorsement to be issued to foreign officers have to be issued by the flag State under the STCW Convention as ameded. Second, the provisons of the ship officers' act shall not be made applicable, commensurate with the intention of legislating the mutatis mutandis article 25, to the BHC/HP in such a way that is in infringement with the jurisdiction of flag State of those foreign ships. Third, the mutatis mutandis article shall be made applicable to only such areas of manning standards not covered under the STCW Convention as amended and shall exclude those provisions pertaining to the issuance of various certificates of which the jurisdiction is rested with flag State under the international instrument. Fourth, the article 10 bis(1) is not a provision requiring foreign officers wishing to serve on a BBC/HP to obtain a Korean endorsement. In summation, the article 10 bis shall be used only in the cases where foreign officers wishing to serve on a Korean flag ship are required to obtain korean endorsement.

• Proceedings of KOSOMES biannual meeting
• /
• 2018.06a
• /
• pp.181-181
• /
• 2018

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Marine Engineers Conference
• /
• 2005.11a
• /
• pp.90-91
• /
• 2005

• Proceedings of the Korean Society of Marine Engineers Conference
• /
• 2006.06a
• /
• pp.129-132
• /
• 2006