韓中日 海商法 比較 硏究 - 統一化를 중심으로 -
A Comparative Study of Maritime Law of Korea, Japan and China
0
조회
0
다운로드
7
인용
0
참고문헌
키워드
초록
The authors try to compare maritime law of Korea, Japan and China and to suggest a way of unification of maritime law for the purpose of providing predictability for stake holders involved in maritime business. There are several differences in the maritime law among three countries as follows: (i) the limitation amount for the ship owner (ii) the scope of the carrier’s obligation (iii) how to protect the shipper (iv) ship arrest and maritime lien. The limitation amount of Japan is the highest one among three countries. The carrier’s scope of obligation in Korea is broader than that of Japan and China. The ship arrest and maritime lien regime among three countries are fragmented. Furthermore, in relation to multi-modal transportation, the comprehensive codified law can not be found among three countries. By ratifying 1976 LLMC and it protocol of 1996, the unification can be achieved in terms of limitation amount and dual limitation proceeding in several countries. Ratifying Rotterdam Rules may give three countries an opportunity to unify the carriage of goods by sea. In relation to multimodal transportation, making new convention for three countries is required. Establishing common oil pollution fund for three countries may solve the compensation issue when oil pollution occurs in the region. The unification for ship arrest and maritime lien regime can be achieved by ratifying the relevant international conventions.
Abstract
The authors try to compare maritime law of Korea, Japan and China and to suggest a way of unification of maritime law for the purpose of providing predictability for stake holders involved in maritime business. There are several differences in the maritime law among three countries as follows: (i) the limitation amount for the ship owner (ii) the scope of the carrier’s obligation (iii) how to protect the shipper (iv) ship arrest and maritime lien. The limitation amount of Japan is the highest one among three countries. The carrier’s scope of obligation in Korea is broader than that of Japan and China. The ship arrest and maritime lien regime among three countries are fragmented. Furthermore, in relation to multi-modal transportation, the comprehensive codified law can not be found among three countries. By ratifying 1976 LLMC and it protocol of 1996, the unification can be achieved in terms of limitation amount and dual limitation proceeding in several countries. Ratifying Rotterdam Rules may give three countries an opportunity to unify the carriage of goods by sea. In relation to multimodal transportation, making new convention for three countries is required. Establishing common oil pollution fund for three countries may solve the compensation issue when oil pollution occurs in the region. The unification for ship arrest and maritime lien regime can be achieved by ratifying the relevant international conventions.
참고문헌 (54)
- 김인현, "해상법" (2011), 법문사
- 김인현, "해상교통법" (2013), 삼우사
- 김인현, "선박충돌법" (2013), 법문사
- 김인현, "해상법연구" (2003), 삼우사
- 김인현, "해상법연구II" (2008), 삼우사
- 김정호, "상법총칙상행위법" (2014), 법문사
- 이철송, "상법총칙 상행위법" (2014), 박영사
- 배병태, "주석 해상법" (1981), 사법행정학회
- 송상현, "해상법원론", 박영사
- 석광현, "국제사법해설" (2001), 지산
- 심재두, "해상보험법" (1997), 길안사
- 이균성, "해상법대계" (2013), KMI
- 임동철, "해상법 국제운송법연구" (1990), 진성사
- 정동윤, "상법(상)" (2012), 법문사
- 최준선, "보험법 해상법" (2010), 삼영사
- 최종현, "해상법상론" (2014), 박영사
- 채이식, "상법IV" (2001), 박영사
- 채이식, "한중일비교 해상법" (2013), 세창출판사
- 호문혁, "민사소송법" (2006), 법문사
- 부산지방법원, "선박집행실무" (2014)
- Farnsworth, "Nautical Rules of the Road" (1996), Cornell Maritime Press
- Zhao Yuelin, "Collision Avoidance and Watchkeeping" (2010), Dalian Maritime University
- In Hyeon Kim, "Transport Law in South Korea" (2013), Wolter Kluwer
- 萬鄂湘, "涉外商事海事審判指導" (2011), 人民法院出版社
- 戶田修三, "海商法" (1990), 文眞堂
- 中村眞澄, "海商法" (2013), 成文堂
- 箱井崇史, "現代海商法" (2014), 成文堂
- 戶田修三, "海商法" (1990), 文眞堂
- 落合誠一, "海法大系" (2003), 商事法務
- 田中誠二, "海商法詳論" (1985), 勁草書房
- 和田啓史, "槪說海上交通法" (1985), 海文堂
- 江頭憲治郞, "商取引法" (2010), 弘文堂
- 戶田修三, "註解 國際海上物品運送法" (1996), 靑林書院
- 海運集會所, "海事法硏究會誌 2012.5(제215호)", ~ (2012)
- 김인현, "2010년 법무부 복합운송법 제정안의 성립 경위와 중요 내용", 상사법연구, 30(1), pp.269~302 (2011), 한국상사법학회
- 김인현, "세월호 사고 예방대책 어디까지 왔나?", 2014년 제2차 해상법 이슈진단(2014.7.16.), 고려대, ~ (2014)
- 김인현, "실무에서 나타나는 다양한 선하증권과 그 대용물", 국제거래법연구, 22(1), pp.259~283 (2013), 국제거래법학회
- 김인현, "골든 로즈호 衝突事件에서 豫想되는 法的 爭點에 대한 小考", 해사법연구, 19(2), pp.215~232 (2007), 한국해사법학회
- 김인현, "캐나다의 유류오염보상기금제도와 그 시사점", 한국해법학회지, 32(2), pp.143~176 (2010), 한국해법학회
- 김종호, "미국법상 대물소송(Action in rem) 제도에 관한 소고", 한양법학, 23(4), pp.259~293 (2012), 한양법학회
- 김창준, "중복적 책임제한절차의 법률관계", 한국해법학회지, 35(1), pp.53~78 (2013), 한국해법학회
- 서동희, "선주책임제한의 준거법", 법조, 47 (1998)
- 정병석, "해상법 분야에서 국제사법적 쟁점 -관할 및 책임제한제도 중심-", 국제사법연구, (16), pp.197~217 (2010), 한국국제사법학회
- 정영석, "船舶所有者의 責任制限에 있어서 準據法의 決定", 한국해법학회지, 15(1) (1993)
- 최용철, "선박유류사고손해배상 및 보상에 관한 연구", 석사, pp.2010
- 崔龍哲, "韓國과 中國의 船舶擔保物權에 관한 比較硏究", 박사, 법학과, pp.2014
- 한충수, "국제민사소송의 국제적인 흐름과 우리의 입법 과제 – 일본의 국제재판관할 관련 민사소송법 개정법률안을 중심으로 –", 민사소송, 14(2), pp.66~114 (2010), 한국민사소송법학회
- 谷川, "涉外判例百選(第3版)(No. 133, 1995.5.)" (1995), 有斐閣
- 曲濤, "船泊碰撞損害賠償責任主體之認定", 大連海事大學學報(社會科學版), 7(6) (2008)
- In Hyeon Kim, "Korean Collision Avoidance Rules and Apportionment of Liability", ABL, 8 (2001)
- In Hyeon Kim, "Warranty and the Pay-to-be-paid Rule in Korea", JMLC, 43(4)
- Jiro Kubo, "Marine Insurance General Conditions", Terms in Japanese market, 2013, ~
- Zhu Zuoxian, "A Commentary on Chinse Marine Insurance Clauses", the 6th East Asia Maritime Law Forum (2013)
- Matsuda Tadahiro, "Recent Development of Japanese Maritime Law- The Amendment of the Code of Civil Procedure and its Reflections on the Case of Collision between Vessels in Japan", the 5th East Asia maritime Law Forum (2012)