실체적 규정의 해석에 의한 UN해양법협약 강제적 관할권 배제의 문제해결

The sea is the most important resource for human in the world. We have used it as fishing, navigation, mining minerals, scientific research and military activities from the ancient times. As more and more countries are getting interested in economic values of the sea, they have come into conflict with other countries. Some assert that countries cannot own the sea due to its inherent nature, therefore, all countries can use it freely. The other, however, argue that they can occupy the sea to the limited extent and have exclusive jurisdiction. This is an on-going debate between mare liberum and mare clausum. The international community had tried to make an international agreement about the use of the sea. as a result, they made the convention of law of the sea in 1982. The convention have not only many substantive clauses of sea, but also compulsory binding dispute settlement system. However the convention has general limitations and optional exceptions in the dispute settlement. It is problem that most of excluded disputes are the most implicated part in the international disputes of the sea. In this paper, I will explain the reason of having the limitation and exception clauses in UN convention of the law of the sea and, the problems of two clauses. The solutions lie in an agreed interpretation of substantive clauses. By using a historical approach, I will examine the disputes of the sea and the documents of UN conferences of the law of the sea.