beta
(영문) 대법원 1989. 7. 11. 선고 88도1998 판결

[선박직원법위반][집37(2)형,714;공1989.9.1.(855),1263]

Main Issues

Whether the excursion ship may constitute a passenger ship under the Ship Personnel Act (affirmative)

Summary of Judgment

In light of the provisions of Articles 1 and 11 of the Ship Personnel Act, the concept of a passenger ship under the Ship Safety Act for the purpose of securing physical facilities suitable for the safe navigation of a ship shall be deemed to be the same as the concept of a passenger ship under the Ship Personnel Act for the purpose of securing human elements suitable for the stable navigation of a ship. Thus, even if a excursion ship is transported by tourists, it constitutes a passenger ship under Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Ship Safety Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12225 of Aug. 13, 1987), if it is a passenger ship under Article 11 of the Ship Personnel Act, and Article 22(1) of

[Reference Provisions]

Article 11 of the Ship Personnel Act, Article 22(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, Article 2 of the Ship Safety Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 1225 of August 13, 1987)

Escopics

Defendant

upper and high-ranking persons

Defendant

Judgment of the lower court

Cheongju District Court Decision 88No41 delivered on September 28, 1988

Text

The appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

We examine the grounds of appeal.

Article 11 (Standards for Ship Personnel) of the Ship Personnel Act provides that a shipowner shall have a marine officer who meets the standards for service on board a ship's personnel prescribed by the Presidential Decree, taking into account the navigation area, size and use of a ship, the estimated engine of a propelling agency, and other matters concerning the stability in navigation of a ship. Article 22 (1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act provides that a passenger ship, the navigation area of which is a coastal waters, shall have a captain who is qualified as a 6th mate or higher, and a ship, other than a passenger ship, shall have a captain who is qualified as a small ship inspector work on board.

Meanwhile, according to Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree of the Ship Safety Act (amended by Presidential Decree No. 12225 of Aug. 13, 1987), the term "passenger ship" means a ship that can load at least 13 passengers, excluding those under the age of 1 of the shipowner customs officers, among the total number of passengers on board, and Article 2 of the Maritime Transportation Act provides the same provision.

However, Article 1 of the Ship Personnel Act provides that the purpose of this Act is to ensure the safety of the navigation of ships by prescribing the qualifications of the persons to serve aboard ships as ship personnel, and considering the fact that Article 11 of the above Act requires a marine officer to be appointed to take into account the safety of the navigation of ships, taking into account the safety of the navigation of ships, the concept of a passenger ship under the Ship Safety Act for the purpose of securing physical facilities suitable for the safe navigation of ships and the concept of a passenger ship under the Ship Personnel Act for the purpose of securing the safety of ships. Therefore, even if the instant ship carries a floating ship for transporting passengers, it shall be deemed that the instant ship constitutes a passenger ship under Article 11 of the Ship Personnel Act and Article 22(1) of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act, since it constitutes a ship with a capacity of 19.53 tons, which is 50 passengers, and therefore, a captain who has the qualifications of a

Article 11 of the Ship Personnel Act merely provides that the vessel of this case is not a passenger vessel under Article 22 of the Enforcement Decree of the same Act.

Therefore, the appeal is dismissed. It is so decided as per Disposition by the assent of all participating Justices on the bench.

Justices Park Yong-dong (Presiding Justice)