메뉴 건너뛰기
.. 내서재 .. 알림
소속 기관/학교 인증
인증하면 논문, 학술자료 등을  무료로 열람할 수 있어요.
한국대학교, 누리자동차, 시립도서관 등 나의 기관을 확인해보세요
(국내 대학 90% 이상 구독 중)
로그인 회원가입 고객센터 ENG
주제분류

추천
검색

논문 기본 정보

자료유형
학술저널
저자정보
저널정보
한국외국어대학교 법학연구소 외법논집 외법논집 제36권 제2호
발행연도
2012.1
수록면
192 - 203 (12page)

이용수

표지
📌
연구주제
📖
연구배경
🔬
연구방법
🏆
연구결과
AI에게 요청하기
추천
검색

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기
The requisite for making duty of care with respect to marine accidents under the Maritime Safety Act has several problems so that it shallbe interpreted and reformed as follows. First, the Maritime Safety Act does not have a substantive provision with regard to ‘the definition of the marine accident’, but it shallbe an accident related to safety of ships and sailing under the purpose of the act. Second, the Act imposes duty of care on the master as well as the ship-owner in the event of the marine accident, but it is legislatively appropriate that the regulation shall be rescinded (removed) and limited to the master Third, ‘the necessary measure’, ‘the scope of the report’, and ‘the fulfillment scope of the order’among requisites which a person has to fulfill in the case of the marine accident shall be established under the benefit and protection of law for public interests preventing the obstacle and danger of the marine traffic. Fourth, a necessary measure would not obviously need in advance of a report because the purpose of the Act is to secure the smooth traffic of the vessel flow, even though it provides that one shall notify after necessary measure in the event of the marine accident. Fifth, it is not reasonable that the necessary duty of care does not apply to a person who violates itself although it is the most important method to secure the safety of the marine traffic among ‘necessary duty of care’, ‘duty of notice (report)’, and ‘duty of order’. Sixth, legislation is needed to impose sanctions which divide marine accidents resulting from intent and negligence into no fault.

목차

등록된 정보가 없습니다.

참고문헌 (26)

참고문헌 신청

이 논문의 저자 정보

최근 본 자료

전체보기

댓글(0)

0