해양안전심판 원인규명재결의 취소소송*- 행정처분성 인정을 중심으로 -

Maritime accidents, which manifest in various forms such as ship collisions, groundings, capsizings, fires, explosions, and sinkings, can lead to severe consequences, including loss of life, property damage, and environmental destruction. To prevent and minimize the recurrence of these accidents, the Republic of Korea has established and operates the Korean Maritime Safety Tribunal (KMST) under the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries. The KMST conducts quasi-judicial procedures to identify the causes of accidents and clarify responsibility. The KMST's judgments are categorized as disciplinary judgments, recommendatory judgments, and fact-finding judgments. Among these, the fact-finding judgments focus primarily on determining the causes of accidents and preventing future recurrence. Under current Korean law, fact-finding judgments are not considered to directly affect the rights and obligations of citizens. Consequently, they are not recognized as administrative dispositions, and revocation suits against them are currently disallowed. This paper aims to establish the legitimacy of subjecting the KMST's fact-finding judgments to administrative revocation suits. To achieve this end, it conducts an in-depth analysis of the substantive impact of these judgments on citizens' rights and obligations. It further examines related Supreme Court precedents to identify their inherent problems. Based on these analyses and examinations, this paper argues for the necessity and justification of permitting administrative revocation suits against fact-finding judgments. By proposing a novel understanding of the legal status of fact-finding judgments, this study is expected to contribute to the substantive protection of citizens' rights and interests.