領土ㆍ海洋境界 분쟁과 地圖ㆍ海圖의 證據 地位ㆍ價値 : 독도 관련 地圖ㆍ海圖의 法ㆍ政策ㆍ外交를 중심으로 :독도 관련 地圖ㆍ海圖의 法ㆍ政策ㆍ外交를 중심으로

朴玄鎭

추천

검색

질문

자료유형: 학술저널

저자정보: 朴玄鎭

저널정보: 대한국제법학회 국제법학회논총 國際法學會論叢第53卷第1號 (通卷第110號)

발행연도: 2008.4

수록면: 61 - 98 (38page)

이용수

📌

연구주제

📖

연구배경

🔬

연구방법

🏆

연구결과

초록· 키워드

오류제보하기

도서 영유권 분쟁 또는 국경/해양경계(대륙붕ㆍEEZ 등) 분쟁 관련 국제재판에서 지도ㆍ해도가 증거능력을 인정받기 위해서는 국가의 감독하에 국가의 의사를 반영하여 분쟁당사국이 간행한 공인지도로서 그 객관성ㆍ중립성ㆍ정확성이 입증되어야 한다. 국제판결은 조약ㆍ공식 문서의 본문에 부속ㆍ편입된 認證地圖ㆍ海圖의 경우에는 문서증거와 동등한 1차적 증거로서의 證據能力과 證明力을 인정한다. 例示목적의 지도ㆍ해도 또는 공인/비공인 단독 지도ㆍ해도에는 조약ㆍ문서 증거를 보조하는 2차적 증거로서의 지위를 인정한다. 또 오류 있는 지도라고 하여 그 증거능력 자체가 부정되는 것만은 아니다. 이 경우 국제재판소는 통상 객관성과 정확성이 인정되는 다른 지도들과 비교하여 추론하기 때문이다. 국제판결은 지도ㆍ해도의 증거능력과 증명력의 요건으로 구체적 축척을 규정하지는 않으나, 소축척 지도는 그 정밀성의 한계로 인하여 증거능력이 부인되는 경향이 있다.
영유권 분쟁 또는 국경/해양경계 관련 국제사법쟁송에서 승소가능성은 결국 ‘상대적으로 우월한’ 권원의 증거를 가진 쪽에 있다. 특히 지도ㆍ해도가 문서증거, 정황증거나 국가실행(묵인 등)과 결함하는 경우 시너지효과를 발휘하여 권원을 강화한다. 무엇보다도 지도?해도는 시각적 효과로 인해 국제재판과정에서 재판관들의 심증형성에 중요한 역할과 기능을 행사한다. 지도ㆍ해도는 그 성격상 地理的ㆍ政治的事實과 情報를 표시하는 圖面일 뿐만 아니라, 權利變動을 가져오는 法律事實을 기재하는 증거로서의 가치를 지닌 資料 (cartographic evidence or material)이다. 이러한 지도ㆍ해도의 증거로서의 자격과 가치에 관한 국제 판결에 비추어, 독도 관련 고지도들의 가치를 평가ㆍ분류할 필요가 있다. 아울러 「측량법」과 「수로업무법」등 관련 국내법에 지도ㆍ해도 간행의 법적 요건ㆍ절차와 책임을 강화함과 동시에, 지도 전문가를 양성하는 지도정책을 수립하여 국익에 반하는 영유권 귀속 주체ㆍ지명을 표시한 제3국 정부ㆍ민간 간행 세계지도에 지속적으로 이의를 제기하여 수정을 요구하는 적극적 ‘지도외교’(국가실행)가 절실하다.

In international litigation of territorial, frontier and/or maritime boundary disputes, international courts and arbitral tribunals, confronted always with a sticky situation of conflicting or even diametrically opposed contentions, have relied for primary evidence on treaties binding upon the parties, and/or diplomatic and official records to determine legal title to territory. At the same time, international jurisprudence has gradually mitigated its previous adamant position to pronounce that a map, when satisfying certain conditions such as accuracy, impartiality and cogency, is well qualified as primary and secondary evidence.
This means that a map is no longer simply a drawing or printing of geographical facts, data and information intended to describe on a certain scale geographic and geomorphic features (topography, configuration, contours, etc.) of the lands, frontiers, mountains, rivers, lakes, coasts and islands. Maps are now taken as constituting a separate category of documentary evidence establishing territorial sovereignty, frontier lines or even maritime boundaries. Maps are thus now regarded as representing political and legal(dispositive) facts and embodying the intentions of the contending parties.
Initially, admissibility of cartographic evidence was ruled out, except for certified or authenticated maps annexed to, incorporated into and identified explicitly in the texts of treaties or official documents. This may explain why in its 2002 Decision Regarding Delimitation of the Border, the five-member Eritrea-Ethiopia Boundary Commission made an express mention that it would produce a final demarcation map of the whole boundary on a scale of 1: 25,000 after the Decision and that it would be definitive. The final map would thus be accorded the standing of a certified map in any further future boundary disputes.
This express reference immediately reminds one of the 1962 Temple of Preah Vihear case, where the International Court of Justice(ICJ) confirmed that the frontier map at issue had never been formally approved by the first Mixed Commission of Delimitation of the frontiers as such, since it had ceased to function prior to the production of the map. Nevertheless, after having sifted through various documents leading to the publication of the map, the ICJ ruled that although the map had lacked a legally binding character in its inception and at the time of its production, it was thus subsequently invested with an official standing.
The grounds given were that the map had been produced by the French Government officers and printed and published by a French cartographic firm of repute in response to a request from the Siamese authorities(p.21). The Court's interpretation and reasoning appear to have been based on the conclusion that the production and publication of the map had been mandated by the first and second Mixed Commission of Delimitation. It is, however, not clear whether the Court accorded the frontier map the status of a certified map or simply that of an officially produced independent map.
It was not until 1986 that the ICJ in the Burkina Faso/Mali Frontier Dispute, faced with an embarrassing situation of no firm documentary evidence, went to great lengths to accept as admissible a semi-official, independent map produced by an independent institute of France, a third country, and to declare as decisive its probative value. This group of independently produced maps, whether official or unofficial, had long been consigned to evidential obscurity. The ICJ in this case did not make any distinction between general and sketch maps in terms of their admissibility and probative force(paras.94-95 & 155).
International judgments on territorial and/or boundary disputes have increasingly included in their respective texts a panoply of sketch maps(croquis), normally appending an explanatory statement that “this map is produced for illustrative purposes only“. Such a statement is interpreted as intended to accord such sketch maps the status of illustrative or reference maps. In other words, the text of judgment may be adduced by the parties as primary evidence in any future proceedings, while inserted maps may well be invoked as secondary evidence.
In this context, it may be noted that the 1982 UN Convention on the Law of the Sea(UNCLOS) requires the coastal state to publish its maritime boundaries or outer limit lines on charts of large or appropriate scales and also to deposit a copy of each such chart with the United Nations Secretary General. Such illustrative charts are thus interpreted as secondary evidence in any future maritime boundary disputes. The reason for this interpretation is that international courts have only to follow the UNCLOS rules for maritime delimitation, instead of confirming the intentions of the contesting parties as represented on their charts.
It may well be asked, en passant, "Is international jurisprudence on territorial or frontier disputes applicable mutatis mutandis to maritime ones?" In the 2002 Cameroon/Nigeria Land and Maritime Boundary case, the ICJ dismissed the Cameroon's contention that the Court's reasoning in the 1986 Burkina Faso/Mali Frontier Dispute and the 1994 Libya/Chad Territorial Dispute in regard to land boundaries is necessarily transposable to those concerning maritime boundaries.
The Court opined that they were "two distinct areas of law to which different factors and considerations apply"(para.238).
Maps published by a third country may be admissible and enjoy certain evidentiary effect to the extent that they are accurate, impartial and consistent with other evidence, thus credible on the whole. This is especially so when the map was published by a colonial power or suzerain in relation to its former colony. However, according to UN practice, maps published by it are, as a matter of principle, not interpreted as constituting any approval or recognition of title to territory. UN maps are thus not admissible, unless it has been explicitly mandated or delegated to produce or publish maps, entrusted with such a task by express consent of the parties, or required by special circumstances.
Furthermore, contemporary international jurisprudence does not define, nor distinguish between large- and small-scale maps in terms of their admissibility and evidentiary value. Nevertheless, international courts and arbitral tribunals are reputed to be reluctant to recognize the admissibility of maps and charts produced on too small a scale. The reason for this is obvious: They are not precise enough to pinpoint or shed light on particular locations, frontiers and maritime features. The indication of longitudes and latitudes is not considered required or essential either for the admissibility of maps or charts.
Maps are not free from errors in the representation of names or geographical facts. Errors may also occur in transcribing native place-names into the Roman alphabet(misnomer). Transliteration poses considerable problems where indigenous place-names are not matched with the Roman alphabet, as aptly demonstrated in the Island of Palmas arbitration. Erroneous maps, however, may not automatically invalidate their admissibility in toto. Such errors would normally vitiate their probative effect, according to international jurisprudence established in the Palmas case, the 1986 Burkina Faso/Mali case and the 2002 Cameroon/Nigeria Boundary case.
All in all, an impressive array of maps would make out a case of relative strength for a superior claim. Such a rich pool of maps would, when combined with other evidence, produce a 'synergy effect' to stake a claim superior to the other's one. Even if that were not the case, it would be fair to say that a long queue of even illustrative and independently produced maps, though not reckoned to be primary evidence in an international court of law, would, by dint of their visual effect, have considerable impact or apply pressure on the minds of judges towards the formation of legal conviction.
Thus, in the 1998 Eritrea/Yemen Territorial Dispute Arbitration, the Permanent Court of Arbitration(PCA) did not rule on the basis of a plethora of maps of every conceivable period and provenance produced especially by Yemen, saying that they did not represent the real or true intentions of the parties. Nevertheless, the Court did not hide an overall impression that Yemen had "a marginally better case" from the favourable maps discovered to establish "a certain widespread repute" that those islands appertain to Yemen(para.490).
International jurisprudence on map evidence in territorial, frontier or maritime boundary disputes is still at an inchoate stage of development and evolution. There exists no systematic body of the international law of map evidence from A to Z. It begs more questions than answers. But international judgments have demonstrated an increasingly liberal attitude towards admitting map evidence. And international case law on map evidence will certainly obtain in a more coherent form in the future as a material source of international law or de facto applicable rules in the international law of map evidence governing territorial or boundary disputes.
Finally, in line with the developments in international jurisprudence on map evidence, Korean state practice such as diplomatic practice and domestic legislation and policies need be tuned to the evolving international law of map evidence. In particular, in view of the function of maps representing geographical, political and dispositive facts, tighter legal regulation of official or unofficial map production may be justified. Again, sustained and strenuous efforts should be exerted towards correcting imprecise or incorrect manifestation of geographical and political facts on foreign maps or charts and in relevant international fora.

#인증지도 #예시지도 #일반지도 #약식지도 #시제법 #대/소축척지도 #세계측지계 #오류 #지도정책 #지도외교 #certified map. illustrative map #general map #sketch map #inter-temporal law #large-/small-scale map #World Geodetic System #error #map policies #map diplomacy

참고문헌 (51)

참고문헌 신청

1. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 박현진 / 2007 / 獨島領有權과 地圖海圖의 證據能力證明力 / 국제법학회논총 52 (1) : 89 ~ 128

2. [인터넷자원] - / / .

3. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 나이토 세이츄(內藤正中) / 2005 / 竹島渡海免許를 둘러싼 문제 / 독도논문번역선 I : 91 ~ 98

4. [학술지(정기간행물)] - 백충현 / 1982 / 영토분쟁의 해결방식과 증거 / 法學 23 (4) : 17 ~ 18

5. [학위논문] - 신각수 / 1991 / 국경분쟁의 국제법적 해결에 관한 연구 / 박사 / 서울대

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

논문 유사도에 따라 DBpia 가 추천하는 논문입니다. 함께 보면 좋을 연관 논문을 확인해보세요!

이 논문의 저자 정보

朴玄鎭

소속기관 대한국제법학회

주요연구분야 사회과학 > 법학

논문수 5 이용수 2,059

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

독도 문제에 대한 한국인의 인식 : 2011년 국경인식조사를 토대로

이성환 일본문화연구 2012 .04

동아시아 근대와 영토, 문학

최영호 인문연구 2006 .12

한일관계사연구회 지음, 독도와 대마도 (지성의 샘, 1996, 296면)

張舜順 한일관계사연구 1996 .12

독도1947에서 1951까지의 노정

김태기 황해문화 2010 .12

1954년 일본의회 ‘독도국제사법재판소(ICJ)제소’ 추진발언과 배경분석 : 일본의회 독도관련 기록 모음집을 중심으로

곽진오 일본문화학보 2011 .02

최근 본 자료

전체보기

UCI(KEPA) : I410-ECN-0101-2009-360-018493878

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	원문	원문 PDF 파일
AI 학습용 데이터	원문 + 메타 (기본/상세)	원문 PDF 파일 및 서지정보 CSV
대량 구매용 데이터	B2B 구독 방식	특정 자료 한정으로 원문 접근 권한 부여
대량 구매용 데이터	URL 전달 방식	바로 PDF 뷰어를 열람할 수 있는 URL 제공

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
AI 학습용 데이터	기본 메타	발행기관명, 간행물명, 권호명, 권(vol), 호(issue), 통권, 발행연도, 발행월, 논문명, 저자명, 시작페이지, 종료페이지, 전체페이지, 상세페이지URL
상세 메타 데이터	발행기관 메타	발행기관 이명, 영문명, 창립연도, 홈페이지URL, 발행기관 소개
	간행물 메타	부제목, 간행물 유형, ISSN, ISBN, 최초발행연도, 폐간연도, 간행빈도, 발행주기, 등재사항, 이용수, 피인용수, 권호수, 논문수, 표지이미지
	논문 메타	작성 언어, 부제목, 대등제목, 목차, 키워드, 초록, 이미지, 참고문헌, 이용수, 피인용수, 논문활용도, DBpia통합주제분류, KDC분류, DDC분류, 한국연구재단분류, UCI, DOI
	저자 메타	소속기관, 소속부서, 직급, 연구분야, 연구키워드, 이용수, 피인용수, 저자 논문활용도

구분	그룹	데이터 항목
※ 결합형/맞춤형 메타 데이터는 신청 내용에 따라 다양하게 제공 가능
이용순위 정보	주제분야별 많이 이용된 논문	“인문학”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	이용기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“중고등학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	세부기관별 많이 이용된 논문	“서울대학교”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
	키워드별 많이 이용된 논문	“Chat GPT”에서 많이 이용된 논문 TOP100
키워드 정보	많이 이용된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 이용된 키워드
	많이 발행된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 발행된 키워드
	많이 검색된 키워드	특정기간/분야/저널 내 많이 검색된 키워드
	연구 트렌드 키워드	특정 키워드 연관 연구동향 분석 데이터 키워드

논문 기본 정보

초록· 키워드

AI 요약

연구주제

연구배경

연구방법

연구결과

주요내용

목차

참고문헌 (51)

함께 읽어보면 좋을 논문

이 논문의 저자 정보

이 논문과 함께 이용한 논문

최근 본 자료

댓글(0)