신국제사법의 해사 국제재판관할 규정에 관한 소고 - 영미법상 해사대물소송을 중심으로 -

The fully amended Private International Law of Korea(“KPIL”) has come into force since 7. 5. 2022. Under the amendment, the Ship Arrest Jurisdiction, allowing the courts of the country in which the arrest was made to have jurisdiction to determine the merits of the cases, is introduced to the international maritime cases under courts of Korea. As the Ship Arrest Jurisdiction is considered as the key element of maritime claim in rem of common laws, it is possible to implement maritime litigation similar to claim in rem in Korea, even though claim in rem is not legally recognized under laws of Korea. Thus, there is a great need to obtain implications by studying on the maritime claim in rem system under common laws. In this paper, we first examine the specific aspects of the maritime claim in rem of United Kingdom and United States. By looking into the specific procedures of maritime claim in rem, including international adjudicatory jurisdiction of maritime cases, we can compare maritime litigation procedure of Korea to that of common law countries. We also review the ship arrest jurisdiction provisions of the 1952, 1999 arrest convention and compare them to the ship arrest procedures of common laws and Korea. Through those reviews, we can derive implications on proper interpretation of the newly introduced Ship Arrest Convention provision of KPIL. Along with the necessity of establishing the admiralty court, which is currently actively being discussed in Korea, we also need to review the meaning of introduction of the Ship Arrest Jurisdiction and future tasks on establishing the admiralty court of Korea.