본문 바로가기
KERD
논문KCI 등재

오징어 채낚기 어선에 항법상 지위 - 어선 제27경진호 충돌사건(중해심 제2003-013호)에 대한 재결을 중심으로-

Legal Status of the Cuttle-fish Catching Vessel under Marine Traffic Law - Focused on the Central KMST' No. 27 Kyungjin Case(Docket No. 2003-13)-

0

조회

0

다운로드

4

인용

0

참고문헌

키워드

주제분류법학

초록

A cuttle-fish catching vessel in Korea is using a sea anchor in front of the vessel in order to keep the vessel from being drifted by the wind when it catches cuttle-fish. Therefore, there is no doubt that the vessel is somewhat restricted in her ability to take avoiding action. Three possibility exists in relation to which grade of priority can be allowed to the vessel. In 1999, Korea Marine Safety Tribunal rendered that the vessel had a priority as a vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre by the operation of the good seamanship of Rule 2 of COLREG. It allowed the vessel to have a priority over the general power-driven vessel. However, in 2003 the same Tribunal decided that the vessel had a priority not as a vessel engaged in fishing but as a vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre under Rule 3(g) and Rule 18 of COLREG. This decision resulted in that the vessel engaged in fishing should avoid the cuttle-fish catching vessel as a vessel restricted in her ability. Bearing in mind that even if the cuttle-fish catching vessel has a sea anchor, the vessel can use ahead engine, the writers argue that the cuttle-fish catching vessel is somewhat restricted in her ability to manoeuvre but it is not so much restricted as the vessel restricted in her ability under Rule 18 of COLREG. The writers suggest that the vessel's order of the priority should be somewhere between a vessel engaged in fishing and a vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre.

Abstract

A cuttle-fish catching vessel in Korea is using a sea anchor in front of the vessel in order to keep the vessel from being drifted by the wind when it catches cuttle-fish. Therefore, there is no doubt that the vessel is somewhat restricted in her ability to take avoiding action. Three possibility exists in relation to which grade of priority can be allowed to the vessel. In 1999, Korea Marine Safety Tribunal rendered that the vessel had a priority as a vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre by the operation of the good seamanship of Rule 2 of COLREG. It allowed the vessel to have a priority over the general power-driven vessel. However, in 2003 the same Tribunal decided that the vessel had a priority not as a vessel engaged in fishing but as a vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre under Rule 3(g) and Rule 18 of COLREG. This decision resulted in that the vessel engaged in fishing should avoid the cuttle-fish catching vessel as a vessel restricted in her ability. Bearing in mind that even if the cuttle-fish catching vessel has a sea anchor, the vessel can use ahead engine, the writers argue that the cuttle-fish catching vessel is somewhat restricted in her ability to manoeuvre but it is not so much restricted as the vessel restricted in her ability under Rule 18 of COLREG. The writers suggest that the vessel's order of the priority should be somewhere between a vessel engaged in fishing and a vessel restricted in her ability to manoeuvre.

참고문헌 (13)

  1. _, "선박충돌과 항법" (2002), 효성출판사
  2. 김진건, "연근해 어구어법학" (2000), 유일문화사
  3. 윤점동, "국제해상충돌예방규칙" (2000)
  4. 해양안전심판사례집, "중앙해양안전심판원" (2000)
  5. 김인현, "정박선의 항법적용에 대한 소고", 23(4) (1999)
  6. 제14권 제2호, "정류중인 선박에 대한 항법적용 해사법연구", 14(2) (2002)
  7. _, "선박충돌과실비율과 해양안전심판재결과의 관계에 대한 고찰" (2003)
  8. 小川洋一, "船舶衝突の裁決例と解說" (2002), 成山堂書店
  9. 福井淡, "圖說 海上衝突豫防法" (2003), 海文堂
  10. 海上保安問題硏究會, "海上保安と漁業" (2000), 中央法規出版
  11. Craig Allen, "Farwell's Rules of The Nautical Road" (2004), Naval Institutes Press
  12. A, "A Guide to The Collision Avoidance Rules" (1990)
  13. "United States Coast Guard" (1999), Navigation Rules

관련 논문AI추천

이 간행물의 다른 논문 (9건)