선박우선특권상 채무자와 선적국의 의미 - 2014년 대법원 판례를 중심으로-

Abstract

Maritime lien is a very useful tool to protect the claimant’s interest. Regardless of the debtor’s ownership to the vessel, the vessel which involved in the claim is subject to arrest. In 2014, the Korea Supreme Court rendered that the claim made by the time charterer did not triggered the maritime lien under the 1992 Convention. Korean Maritime Law does not have any provision on this matter, which leave the legal relationship unstable. Where the maritime lien is involved in foreign-related matter, the governing law is decided by the law of the country of which the vessel flies pursuant to Korean International Private Law. The Court decided that the country with substantial relationship with the vessel becomes the country of registration under the KIPL in case of the flag of convenience vessel. The Court also stated that the original registration country rather than the bare boat registration country should be regarded as the country for the purpose of deciding maritime lien under KIPL. The author explain the above three cases rendered by the Korean Supreme Court and argued that revision of maritime law is required and lex fori should be adopted for giving foreseeability to the stake-holders involved in the maritime lien.