우주손해책임협약의 해석과 비판 -손해와 책임의 개념을 중심으로

As spaceflight-related accidents or incidents hardly occurs, the Convention on International Liability for Damage Caused by Space Objects adopted in 1972 had been left unattended for a while. In precious few cases, there was a chance for a state to invoke the Convention in response to certain damage caused by space incidents but interpretation thereof throughout international courts never happened. Due to the significant increase of space activities conducted by both public and private entities, however, this article raises a question whether the Convention adopted half a century ago could effectively regulate contemporary issues derived from modern space activities such as transboundary environmental harm and liability of private companies. The article points out that not only the definition of ‘damage’ is too narrow, thereby excluding indirect and consequential environmental harm caused by space objects, but also there is inconsistency between the definition of damage and the form of reparation therefor. The article also provides a critique of the Convention introducing a legal term of ‘liability’ for the first time in history of international law. Albeit the instrument uses the term to distinguish with the term of ‘responsibility’ in law of state responsibility, it seems that the treaty somehow confuses both terms; there is imprecision in the terminology used as the Convention stipulates that a launching state, who violates international law including the UN Charter, has liability to pay compensation. Finally, the article points out that state-centered approach taken by the Convention could not subsume current privatization of space activities since this old and outdated treaty did not postulate such privatization at the very beginning. By way of such interpretation, this article argues that the Convention should be amended to adequately and effectively deal with contemporary issues of environment and space privatization.