해운법상 해상여객운송에 관한 강제보험 고찰

Abstract

The “Seafarers Act” and “Compensation for Oil Pollution Damage Guarantee Act”, which enforce a compulsory insurance among the domestic maritime Acts, are based on a provisions related to a compulsory insurance in accordance with international maritime conventions such as the “MLC 2006”, “CLC 1992” and “BC 2001” which were ratified by Korean Government. On the other hand, a compulsory insurance entry by providers of marine passenger transportation services under the “Marine Transportation Act” does not have a basis for a international maritime convention. In order to effectively manage a compulsory insurance, it is needed to clearly stipulate about who shall have a insurance, what kind of a insurance is, what risks should be covered, how much a minimum insurable amount is or the minimum limit of liability should be applied and whether the compulsory insurance is continually maintained etc. in the Act. However, the current “Marine Transportation Act” says that the party who shall purchase the compulsory insurance is limited, the type of the insurance and risks covered are unclear, there is no provision for the insurable amount or the limit of liability of the insurance contract and above all and there is no legal basis for management of the compulsory insurance as well. In this paper, it was compared and weighed among the domestic Acts that have enforced a compulsory insurance and international maritime convention concerned. It was proposed to alternatives and revision guidelines of the “Marine Transportation Act” to the problems aforesaid based on my business experiences for a P&I insurance.