중일 동중국해 자원 개발 합의의 법적 해석과 우리나라의 대응방안

Joint development arrangement in the East China Sea made by and between China and Japan in 2008 has great implications for Korea's jurisdiction of East China Sea and resource development policy. Joint development arrangement made by and between China and Japan has not been developed into treaty but it is expected that the arrangement itself will make negotiation on jurisdiction of East China Sea and resource development strategy complicated. Joint development arrangement in the East China Sea made by and between China and Japan consists of (1) collaboration on East China Sea (2) joint development (3) Japanese companies' participation in development of ChunXiao oil field in accordance with Chinese law. Joint development arrangement in the East China Sea made by and between China and Japan is transitional measure to solve delimitation of maritime boundaries and it is applicable to provisional arrangements prescribed by UNCLOS and China and Japan agreed that the arrangement shall not infringe on legal positions of China and Japan. However, joint development arrangement in the East China Sea made by and between China and Japan has the following resistances and limits. In addition, the arrangement has the possibilities of plundering resources of Korea and joint development zone between Korea and Japan. First, domestic resistance to political agreement between China and Japan should be overcome. The joint development arrangement is political compromise between China and Japan but Korea opposes the joint development arrangement because China can seriously violate natural prolongation principle of continental shelf and LongJing oil field that Japan requested is not included in agreed zone. Second, trust on political issues and legal issues between China and Japan is required for the arrangement to be developed into treaty but interpretation and approach toward it shows clear limit. China's continuous development in waters other than agreed waters, territorial dispute over Senkaku Island, promotion of collaboration on resource development in waters around Senkaku Island between China and Taiwan and opposite positions on interpretation of arrangement between China and Japan are the chief obstacles to entering into treaty. Third, the limit that dual structure of resource development which the arrangement intends should be overcome. Agreed zone between China and Japan is agreement about spacial boundary to promote joint development and detailed zone to be developed needs agreement between China and Japan. Therefore, we can't exclude the possibility that the arrangement is limited to political agreement in that future joint development requires survey of waters and determination and agreement on zone to be developed. Joint development arrangement in the East China Sea made by and between China and Japan can't be seen as direct violation of jurisdiction considering the fact that agreed zone is located within about 925 m from joint development zone between Korea and Japan signed in 1974 by and between Korea and Japan. However, Korea's diplomatic response to the arrangement is needed considering the fact that agreement on delimitation of maritime boundaries on applicable waters between Korea,China and Japan has not been made and trijunction on the waters should be drawn. Joint development arrangement in the East China Sea made by and between China and Japan can be used as basis that gives objective validity of survey and development of southern continental shelf between Korea and Japan. Japan is reluctant to develop joint development zone between Korea and Japan because Japan considers that the joint development zone lacks resources and economic feasibility. However,such negative attitude of Japan is antinomy considering the fact that joint development zone agreed by and between China and Japan is located within about 1km from joint development zone agreed by and between Korea and Japan and there two zone have considerable geological correlation and Japan shows strong intention to develop joint development zone agreed by and between China and Japan to China. It is necessary for Korea to clarify geological correlation and similarity between the two zones and make good use of it as diplomatic pressure on Japan toward unfaithful fulfillment of Korea-Japan arrangement on continental shelf joint development.