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)-)

서지정보

· 발행기관 : 한국해사법학회
· 수록지 정보 : 해사법연구 / 17권 / 1호 / 23 ~ 38페이지
· 저자명 : 김인현, 이명규

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.

영어초록

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.

참고자료

· 없음