무해통항제도와 통과통항제도의 비교연구

Abstract

The 1982 Law of the Sea Convention establish two types of international navigation regime in the territorial sea : regime of innocent passage and regime of transit passage. The two regime were developed to accomodate conflicting state interests between coastal states(security and environmental interests) and maritime states(navigation). Although regime of transit passage applies to international straits, the geographical aspect of the international straits is generally a part of territorial sea of bordering states.Through a comparative study, we can find some keen differences between two regimes from the following issues : ⅰ) geographical scope, ⅱ) passage of aircraft, ⅲ) suspension of passage, ⅳ) nature and extent of legislative powers, ⅴ) extent of enforcement power, ⅵ) procedure of establishment of Sea lanes and traffic separation schemes, ⅶ) navigation mode of submarines, ⅷ) coastal state's right to the warship which does not comply with its law and regulation.In case of Korea , it has governed passage of foreign ship in the territorial sea by the Territorial Sea and Contiguous Zone Act. However it does not stipulate for transit passage or control of foreign nuclear-powered ship and ships carrying nuclear or other inherently dangerous or noxious substance. Therefore, this article suggests that the following issues should be deliberated and enacted for the improvement of regulating system on foreign ship passage in the territorial sea or through international straits by the group consisting of government officers, experts on international law or and shipping : ⅰ) expansion of the breath of territorial sea in Korean strait, ⅱ) legal status of Cheju strait, ⅲ) control of foreign nuclear-powered ship and ships carrying nuclear or other inherently dangerous or noxious substance, ⅳ) application of Sea lanes and traffic separation schemes in international straits, ⅴ) control of passage of foreign warship and submarine.