유엔의 자위권 해석과 군사적 개입 — 자위권에 기반한 공격을 중심으로 —

Military intervention based on the UN Charter is basically prohibited according to the Principle of Non-Use of Force of Article 2 (4) of the Charter, however, if there is a preemptive strike by the other country and the U.N. Security Council does not take action against the attack, it is possible to exercise the right of self-defense corresponding to the preemptive attack. Due to the recent development of nuclear and biochemical weapons, the Article 51 of the Charter may be broadly interpreted as "if an armed attack seems possible". In particular, there is a debate that preemptive attacks are possible at the level of preventive self-defense when the "armed attack" is considered "imminent and sure to be practiced immediately". However, it should be taken into consideration that the Principle of Non-Use of Force was applied to the Charter after the terrible events of World War I and World War II, and that the criterion for the implementation of anticipatory self-defense rights is 'imminent, urgent situation unavoidable of exercising preemptive strike’. Also given the case of Israeli attack on the Osirak reactor in 1981, there is a potential danger of misjudgment and misconduct because it is decided by the state exercising attack. Therefore, in the case of North Korea’s proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, the military intervention due to the exercise of anticipatory self-defense is not allowed under international law.