이어도 및 이어도 해양과학기지의 법적･정책적 분석 = Legal and Policy Analysis of Ieodo and the Ieodo Ocean Research Station

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The importance of generating profits through the ocean, including maritime security and securing maritime transportation routes, has grown gradually. Therefore, it is crucial for nations to recognize the significance of the ocean and secure their national interests. Major powers strive to secure maritime jurisdiction for their own survival and prosperity, and the waters surrounding Northeast Asia are no exception, with neighboring countries fiercely competing to secure exclusive maritime jurisdiction. Even in the waters surrounding the Korean Peninsula, the three nations of South Korea, China, and Japan, whose maritime breadths are less than 400 nautical miles measuring from each other’s baselines, are witnessing fierce competition for maritime jurisdiction. This study analyzes the international legal significance of Ieodo and the Ieodo Ocean Research Station in the East China Sea. It aims to contribute to national maritime security and policymaking by identifying ways to strengthen maritime sovereignty and delimitation. The discussion begins by analyzing and evaluating existing research on Ieodo. It then analyzes the international legal significance of Ieodo and the Ieodo Ocean Research Station, and examines maritime issues related to Ieodo, including the issue of delimitation.
Previous research on Ieodo and the Ieodo Ocean Research Station can be broadly divided into international legal and cultural/sociological studies. Most studies have assessed Ieodo’s international legal status, clarified maritime jurisdiction, and ultimately examined the potential utility of international tribunals. The Ieodo Ocean Research Station is not a measure to secure Ieodo’s legal status as an island under international law, but rather a structure for marine science and environmental purposes. Ieodo is a submerged reef below the surface. The only way to fundamentally resolve the Ieodo issue is undoubtedly to complete maritime boundary delimitation negotiations between South Korea and China. Regarding the maritime boundary delimitation issue, both South Korea and China must reaffirm the principles of international law and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, which, while challenging, are fundamental. Most of China's claims regarding the relevant circumstances to be considered in the maritime boundary delimitation are likely to be difficult for justification under current case law. From South Korea’s perspective, responding from an international legal perspective is not difficult. Nevertheless, the sharp conflict between the two countries’ positions is likely to pose significant obstacles to future negotiations. A flexible approach, based on the revised median line principle but with a willingness to reexamine China’s relevant circumstances, is necessary. It is undeniable that South Korea and China, separated by the Yellow Sea, compete on issues such as maritime security, fisheries, and resource management, and harbor a degree of distrust regarding each other’s positions and perspectives. This situation also carries the potential for political tensions, including confrontation between the two countries. Therefore, conflict and risk management are crucial, and it is necessary to promote maritime cooperation dialogue and joint projects to create a situation of easing tensions between the two countries.