평화수역의 설치: 법적 쟁점, 영향과 대책 = Establishment of Maritime Peace Zone: Legal Issues, Effects and Countermeasures

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

"Inter-Korean Agreement on Military Matters" adopted in Pyongyang in September 2018 provides for "Maritime Peace Zone(hereafter abbreviated as MPZ)" around the Northern Limit Line(NLL) proclaimed by the commander-in-chief of the United Nations Command in 1953. The western "Sea of Peace" is expected to promote relaxation of military tension and encourage exchanges and cooperation between the South and the North. To meet such expectation, MPZ should be established on the basis of recognition and respect of NLL. It is because NLL is not only de facto maritime demarcation line constituting an integral part of the Korean Armistice regime but also a factual line delimiting the two Korea's territorial jurisdictions, namely, a quasi-border territorial limit line. So the president and the military of the Republic of Korea(ROK) should protect and defend NLL in accordance with a duty to preserve territorial integrity stipulated in Article 66(2) of the the South Korean Constitution. Against this background, MPZ should be formed according to an "equal space criteria" in the south and north Korean sea across the NLL. On the other hand, if MPZ is established in the future, such territorial jurisdictions including the authority to stop, search or seizure ships, the authority to prevent any act violating the law, the authority to levy sanctions etc which ROK has exercised solely and exclusively in the south of NLL would be inevitably restricted to a considerable degree. So it is proper that "Inter-Korean Agreement on Military Matters" should get a prior consent of National Assembly to the ratification by the President. But President Moon Jae In's administration ignored constitutional procedures of parliamentarian consent to the presidential ratification of the instrument. This legal problem must be cured as soon as possible. In addition, the South Korean government should make efforts to minimize negative effects of MPZ and the Maritime Buffer Zone in Western Sea to be engendered in respect of national security.

참고문헌 (Reference)

• 1 국방부 대북정책관실, "｢판문점선언 이행을 위한 군사분야 합의서｣ 해설자료"
• 2 장원근, "홍해해양평화공원 사례 분석 및 남북 접경지역 해양 환경 협력 시사점"
• 3 "헤럴드경제 2013/06/27"
• 4 "중앙일보 2018/10/16"
• 5 통일부, "주간북한동향"
• 6 신원식, "종전선언이 안보에 미치는 영향과 대응방안" 2018
• 7 조갑제, "제2차 평양회담: 평화의 수역은 반드시 분쟁의 수역이 된다"
• 8 제성호, "정전 60년과 NLL 사수의 당위성"
• 9 "연합뉴스 2007/08/10; 2018/10/23; 2018/10/26"
• 10 제성호, "신한일어업협정과 독도영유권: 독도영유권 훼손과 국제법적 대안의 모색" 우리영토 2007
• 11 남정호, "신뢰구축과 단계적 접근으로 서해평화수역 조성 추진 필요" KMI 2019
• 12 김종대, "서해 평화 실현을 위한 민관토론회"
• 13 이동훈, "분쟁수역 평화적 이용 사례: 요르단과 이스라엘 윈-윈"
• 14 이장희, "북방한계선의 국제법적 분석과 재해석" 56 : 1999
• 15 제성호, "북방한계선(NLL)의 법적 유효성과 한국의 대응방향" 중앙법학회 7 (7): 107-149, 2005
• 16 "문화일보 2018/09/20; 2018/09/21; 2018/10/12"
• 17 "동아일보 2007/08/13"
• 18 김영구, "독도 영토주권의 위기" 다솜출판사 2006
• 19 제성호, "남북한 특수관계와 NLL 문제: 영토선 여부와 구속력의 근거를 중심으로" 375 : 2007
• 20 국토통일원, "남북대화 백서" 국토통일원 1988
• 21 차동길, "남북군사합의 무엇이 문제인가!(서해 완충 수역을 중심으로)" 2018
• 22 김성만, "남북 장성급 군사회담 결과에 대한 분석"
• 23 조남훈, "남북 간 북방한계선 첫 명시했지만 서해 NLL 평화수역엔 견해차 여전" 144 : 2018
• 24 백낙청, "기조발언, 자유총연맹-6.15공동선언실천 남측위원회" 2007
• 25 제성호, "군사분야 합의서’의 법적 문제점 –주로 서해 해상의 안보와 관련해서-" 2018
• 26 "https://www.icc-cpi.int/iccdocs/otp/SAS-KOR-Article-5-Public-Report-ENG-05Jun2014.pdf"
• 27 The Office of the Prosecutor, International Criminal Court, "Situation in the Republic of Korea: Article 5 Report" 2014
• 28 김근식, "NLL 일방성과 실질성, 남북한 모두 인정해야"
• 29 서주석, "NLL 수역 평화정착 노력해야"
• 30 국가정보원, "2007 남북정상회담 회의록(10.2-4, 평양)"