. . 1.
2.
. 1.
2.
3.
4.
.
*
: 2012. 10. 29 / : 2012. 11. 22 / : 2012. 11. 30
I.
, 18
.1)
,
“
”
.2) ,
( ‘ ’ )
3)
.4)
5),
1912 1914
1) , “ ”,
, 1997. 12., , 15 .
2) , “ ”, 2002. 11.,
, 5 .
3) 2 .
1. " " ( )
. .
. . . .
1 2. " "
.
4) 1 .
5) 2 , 5-8
.
,
1961. 12. 6. 813 ‘ ’
.
( , ) 6),
,
.7)
( , ) ( ,
) 8),
.9) ,
,
.10)
,
4 .11)
6) 3 .
7) 4 1 5 .
8) 40 58 .
9) 74 1 .
10) , ,
12 , , 2012, 1222 , “ 27
”, , 2010. 12., 191 , , “
”, 17 1 (1995), 47 , “
74 1 ”, 8 (2000. 8.), 102 .
11) , , 175 ; , 1) , 8-9 .
12),
.13)
, .
,
14)
.
.
,
‘ ’ ‘
’ .
15)
,
12) , , 9 .
13) , 11-12 ; , , 184 .
14) ‘ ’ ,
( 2 3 , 39 ).
15) , “ 1”, (2002. 12.),
, 123 .
. 1 ,
,
, 1
,
.
.16)
.
17), .
, ,
,
( ,
)18)
( )19),
, , ,
.20)
16) , , 123 ; , “ ”,
1998. , , 38 .
17) 2 , , 5 .
18) 38 1 .
19) 34 2 .
20) , , 39-40 ; , “ ”,
2002. 11. 4. , .
.
, .21)
, .22)
.23)
1 .
,
.
.
.
.24)
21) , 1) , 266 .
22) 48 1 .
.
23) 45 1 .
24) 5 2 .
25),
.
,
, .
,
. ,
5. 16.
.26)
.
, (DOT, Department of Transportation)
25) , “ ”,
2 1 (2006), , 82 .
26) , , 81 .
(Marine Accident Investigation Branch) ,
(Court of Summary Jurisdiction) (Wreck Commissioner)
2 3 (High Court)27) (The
Supreme Court)28) ,
. , 1
(United States Coast Guard) ,
‘ (The
Independent Safety Board Act)’ ‘
(National Transportation Safety Board)’
, 3 4 (The Appellate Court)
(U. S. Supreme Court) . 1
2
,
(Administrative Law Judge)29) .
, 2008.( 20 ) 10. 1.
. ,
,
. ,
27) High Court 1 ,
High Court Court of Appeal
.
28) (House of Lords) ,
2005 (The Constitutional Reform Act 2005) .
29) (The Administrative
Procedure Act) 556 b [5 U.S.C. 556(b)]
, U.S. Code 7703 7704
(46 CFR 5.19).
2 , 7 ,
.
.30)
,
.
.
31),
.32) ,
33),
.
.
30) 1 .
31) 16 1 .
32) , 1) , 333-334 .
33) , 334
.
, 1 2
, 3
74 1
.
,
. ,
.
. ,
. ,
. ,
4 ,
1 ( ) ,
34),
34) 16 1 .
4 3 .35)
.
,
, .36) ,
2
. ,
,
, 2
. ,
18 3 1 37)
35) 44 1 .
36) , , 204-205 .
37) 18 3( )
. 1.
2.
3.
4. 1 3
.
,
(Admiralty Court) ,
.38) ,
1 ,
2
.39)
,
.40)
,
38) 2007 2011
“2007~2011 ( )”
. http://www.kmst.go.kr/statistics/statisticsyear_list.asp. , 2007.-2011.
20-30 ,
2009 11 2-3
.
39) , , 2005. 12., 22 .
1 .
40) , , 1221 .
,
.
,
. 9 2 3
3 .
,
. 2 ,
4 ( 1 ),
. 2
4
4 ( 2 ) 3 4
( 3 )
. ,
,
.41) 10
‘ ’ ,
20 ,
.
.
41) 14 .
, .
. ,
. ,
,
.
9 ,
9 2 2 . 9 2
2 ,
4 ( 1 ), 2
4 4
( 2 ), 3 3
( 3 ), 1 3 4
( 4 ) .
,
42), 3
3
‘ ’
.43)
42) 11 1 .
43) , 1) , 329 .
1
44),
‘ ’45) 67 1
1 4 ,
.
.
,
4 5 .46)
.
, 3
, ,
.47)
3 .
6 , 10 48),
44) 8 2 .
45) 20722 , 2008. 2. 29., .
46) 1 5 , 1979. 4. 10.
9412 9416
5 4 .
47) 13 .
48) 105 .
, .
3 .49)
,
.50)
51),
.52)
53) 9 2 3
( 5 3
), ,
1 , 1 1 5
, ,
. ,
,
,
49) 60 (
13 4 , 74 ),
.
50) 27 .
51) 29 1 .
52) , “ ”, 31 2
(2011. 8.), , 397 .
53) 28 1 .
1 5
.
.
( " " )
54) ,
. 4 5
.
.55)
,
.
, 28 1
, 3 1
54) 3 .
55) 2 3 , 2 3 .
5
.56)
.
28 1 3 , ‘
’ ,
.
.
. ,
.57)
56) , , 397 1
.
57) 30 ( )
28 2
. 1.
2. 70
3.
4.
.
,
. ,
.
58)
, 2012. 4. 6. ‘
’ .
59),
.60)
, 18
1 17 9
. ,
.
61),
.62)
8
. .
1 3
.
58) 30 2 30 5 .
59) 30 3.
60)
.
61) 1 2 .
62) 3 .
.
,
. 63) 5
, ,
, , ,
.
.
64), 5
.
,
. ,
.
.
63) 1987. 10. 5. , 2011. 2. 25. 273 .
64) , “ ”, 11 1
(2005. 6.), , 9 .
,
.
.
.
.65)
.
4 2 1
2
, 1999. 2. 5.
.
65) , “ ”, (2002. 11.),
, 3 .
.
66),
.67)
4 2 .
,
,
.
,
.68) ,
.
66) , , 87-88 .
67) , “,
562 (2003. 7.), , 92 . 68)
.
.69)
,
.70) ,
4 2
.
71), 72)
.73)
.
, .
,
. .
.
69) , , 88 . , 67) , 111 .
70) , “
”, 43 (2002 )(2003. 07.),
, 236-237 .
71) , , 88 .
72)
( 164 2),
, 2007
( , 5 , , 2009, 68-69 ).
73) , “ ”, 4
(2008), , 188 .
.
.
.
.
4 ,
, 18 3
1 .
4 2 ,
.
4 2
,
.74) ,
.
. ,
.
,
74) , , , 88-89 .
.
, .
5
,
.
,
.
,
.
.
.
, 3
.
, .
,
.
, “
”, 43
(2002 )(2003. 07.),
, “ 74 1 ”,
8 (2000. 8.) ______,
“, 562 (2003. 7.),
, “ ”, 2002. 11. 4. ,
, “ ”,
4 (2008),
, “ ”,
, 1997. 12.,
______, “ ”, 17 1
(1995)
______, “ 1”,
(2002. 12.),
, , 2005. 12.
, “ ”,
2 1 (2006),
, 12 , , 2012
, “ ”, 1998.
,
, 5 , , 2009
, “ 27 ”, , 2010.
12.
, “ ”,
11 1 (2005. 6.),
, “ ”, 2002.
11.,
, “ ”, (2002. 11.),
, “ ”,
31 2 (2011. 8.),
http://www.kmst.go.kr/statistics/statisticsyear_list.asp
< >
.
,
.
.
.
.
.
4
, ,
18 3
1 .
4 2 ,
.
, 5
,
.
Abstract
A Suggestion on the Improvement of Marine Accidents Inquiry System
Lee, Jung-Won*75)
The existing Korean Act on the Investigation of and Inquiry into Marine Accidents(hereunder, ‘KAIIMA’) has lots of problems. Even if the main purpose of KAIIMA lies on the enhancement of marine safety by identifying the cause of marine accidents, there is skepticism whether the legal structure of KAIIMA is throughly focusing on the disciplinary action of the officers of the vessel. It seems to be difficult that current Korean marine accidents inquiry system cannot effectively achieve its main goal, identification of the cause of marine accidents.
For the through investigation of marine accidents, it is necessary that the existing marine accidents investigation and inquiry system must be divided into two independent sections, a section for the investigation and inquiry of marine accidents and another section for the disciplinary action of the officers. For the former, the most effective ways and techniques of investigation shall be introduced instead of the adversary system. For the latter, since the legal characteristics of the disciplinary action is almost the same as the judgment, it is desirable to protect the procedural rights of the defendant. In this context, the disciplinary action of the officers shall be re-organized as below; firstly, regional maritime safety tribunal(1st instance) central maritime safety tribunal(2nd instance) High Court Supreme Court. Secondly, regional maritime safety tribunal or central maritime safety tribunal(1st instance) High Court(2nd instance) Supreme Court. In the second case, regional maritime safety tribunal will play the role as the 1st instance for the most ordinary marine accidents and central maritime safety tribunal may be the 1st instance for the several important marine accidents cases which is stipulated in Article 18-3 of KAIIMA. On the other hand, to avoid becoming the maritime safety tribunal as the civil procedure, it is essential to delete Article 4(2) of KAIIMA. Additionally, to ascertain each officer’s contribution to
* Associate Prof., Attorney at Law, School of Law at Pusan Nat’l Univ.
Journal of Legislation Research / 43th Issue
an accident, judges in the civil trial can rely on some marine accident specialists who are employed by the Supreme Court. Given the facts that maritime safety tribunal is a kind of the trials, lawyers must be included as members of the judgment benches. In addition, co-operation among institutions investigating marine accidents, including Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal and Korean Coast Guard is desirable for the promotion and protection of people’s rights and interests.
Finally, to fully protect defendants and officers in the maritime safety tribunal, it is demanded that Article 5 of Korean Legal Aid Act should be amended for the expansion of the legal aid service which is provided by the Korean Legal Aid Corporation.
:
