A comparative review on civil money penalties in aviation law

C. Lee
{"title":"A comparative review on civil money penalties in aviation law","authors":"C. Lee","doi":"10.31691/kasl34.1.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 1984, Congress enacted a new measure of administrative sanctions which is a civil money penalty program for violations of Aviation Act and its implementing regulations. This civil money penalty system has been in operations in lieu of suspending or revoking certificates issued by Korean government, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport. According to the rules of Aviation Business Act or Aviation Safety Act, where the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport should order an air carrier to suspend operation because of her violation under certain rules, in which case the suspension of operation is likely to cause serious inconvenience to consumers of air transport services or to harm public interest, the Minister of the department may impose an administrative monetary penalty in lieu of the suspension of operation. In this regard, airline related civil money penalties are somewhat different from those of fair trade, which is the origin of the money penalties system in Korea. Civil money penalties in the field of fair trade are imposed on executive duty violations that undermine the value of the market economy order, and focus on reimbursement of profits due to violations and compensation for unfair spending by consumers. However, in the aviation sector, breach of duty by a business operator does not simply cause the property loss of the public, but it has a direct impact on life or property of the public. In this respect, aviation penalties are more likely to be administrative sanctions or punitive measures than refunds of unfair benefits, compared to penalties in the field of fair trade. In general, civil money penalties have been highly preferred as administrative sanctions because they are subject to investigations by administrative experts and thus, efficiency can be ensured and execution is quicker than judicial procedures. Moreover, in Korea, because punitive civil damages cannot awarded by the courts, the imposition of civil money penalties is recognized as a means of realizing social justice by recognizing the legal feelings of the people. However, civil money penalties are administrative sanctions, and in terms of effectiveness, they are similar to criminal fines, which are a form of punishment. Inadequate legislation and operation of penalties imposition may cause damage to the value of Constitution. Under the above recognition, this paper has been described for the purpose of identifying the present status of the civil money penalties imposition system and operating status in the area of air transport under the laws and regulations in Korea. Especially, this paper was focused on exploring the problem and improvement direction of Korean system through the comparative study with foreign laws and regulations.","PeriodicalId":145946,"journal":{"name":"The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy","volume":"179 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-06-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Korean Journal of Air & Space Law and Policy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31691/kasl34.1.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In 1984, Congress enacted a new measure of administrative sanctions which is a civil money penalty program for violations of Aviation Act and its implementing regulations. This civil money penalty system has been in operations in lieu of suspending or revoking certificates issued by Korean government, Ministry of Land, Infrastructure, and Transport. According to the rules of Aviation Business Act or Aviation Safety Act, where the Minister of Land, Infrastructure and Transport should order an air carrier to suspend operation because of her violation under certain rules, in which case the suspension of operation is likely to cause serious inconvenience to consumers of air transport services or to harm public interest, the Minister of the department may impose an administrative monetary penalty in lieu of the suspension of operation. In this regard, airline related civil money penalties are somewhat different from those of fair trade, which is the origin of the money penalties system in Korea. Civil money penalties in the field of fair trade are imposed on executive duty violations that undermine the value of the market economy order, and focus on reimbursement of profits due to violations and compensation for unfair spending by consumers. However, in the aviation sector, breach of duty by a business operator does not simply cause the property loss of the public, but it has a direct impact on life or property of the public. In this respect, aviation penalties are more likely to be administrative sanctions or punitive measures than refunds of unfair benefits, compared to penalties in the field of fair trade. In general, civil money penalties have been highly preferred as administrative sanctions because they are subject to investigations by administrative experts and thus, efficiency can be ensured and execution is quicker than judicial procedures. Moreover, in Korea, because punitive civil damages cannot awarded by the courts, the imposition of civil money penalties is recognized as a means of realizing social justice by recognizing the legal feelings of the people. However, civil money penalties are administrative sanctions, and in terms of effectiveness, they are similar to criminal fines, which are a form of punishment. Inadequate legislation and operation of penalties imposition may cause damage to the value of Constitution. Under the above recognition, this paper has been described for the purpose of identifying the present status of the civil money penalties imposition system and operating status in the area of air transport under the laws and regulations in Korea. Especially, this paper was focused on exploring the problem and improvement direction of Korean system through the comparative study with foreign laws and regulations.
航空法民事罚金制度比较研究
1984年,美国国会颁布了一项新的行政制裁措施,即对违反《航空法》及其实施条例的行为进行民事罚款。该民事罚款制度是代替韩国政府和国土交通部颁发的证书的中止或撤销而实行的。根据《航空事业法》或《航空安全法》的规定,国土交通部长官因航空承运人违反某些规定而责令其暂停运营,而该暂停运营可能对航空运输服务的消费者造成严重不便或损害公共利益的,国土交通部部长可以处以行政罚款代替暂停运营。因此,与航空公司相关的民事罚款与作为罚款制度起源的公平交易有所不同。公平交易领域的民事罚金处罚主要针对破坏市场经济秩序价值的行政职务违法行为,侧重于补偿违法所得利润和赔偿消费者的不公平消费。然而,在航空领域,经营者违反义务并不仅仅造成公众的财产损失,而是对公众的生命或财产产生直接影响。在这方面,与公平贸易领域的处罚相比,航空处罚更有可能是行政制裁或惩罚性措施,而不是退还不公平利益。一般来说,民事罚款作为行政制裁措施受到高度重视,因为它们受到行政专家的调查,因此可以确保效率,而且执行速度比司法程序快。此外,在韩国,由于惩罚性民事损害赔偿不能由法院判决,因此,民事罚款被认为是通过承认国民的法律感受来实现社会正义的一种手段。但是,民事罚金属于行政处罚,就效力而言,与刑事罚金类似,都是一种处罚形式。立法和刑罚实施的不完善可能会损害宪法的价值。在上述认识的基础上,本文对韩国航空运输领域民事罚金征收制度的现状和法律法规下的运行状况进行了阐述。特别是通过与国外法律法规的比较研究,探讨了韩国这一制度存在的问题和完善方向。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信