유엔 대북제재와 남북경협의 양립성 검토 : 대북제재 내용을 중심으로

김녹영 법무부 2021 統一과 法律 Vol.0 No.47

Inter-Korean economic cooperation is currently stalled due to the effects of international sanctions against North Korea, including the United Nations’s. As the UN sanctions against North Korea have been significantly strengthened since 2016, even if the South Korean government lifts its own sanctions such as the “5·24 measures,” it is difficult to promote inter-Korean economic cooperation unless the UN sanctions are lifted. In other words, the UN sanctions on North Korea have become a very important factor in the resumption of inter-Korean economic cooperation in the future. In fact, the international community, including the US, is firmly opposed to the recent move by the South Korean government to resume inter-Korean economic cooperation based on UN sanctions against North Korea. Then, will inter-Korean economic cooperation be possible without lifting international sanctions against North Korea? To approach the answer to this question, this paper examines the compatibility between the UN Sanctions against North Korea and the inter-Korean Economic Cooperation. The issue of lifting international sanctions against North Korea may be largely political and diplomatic, but it will be meaningful to research on it from legal perspective. In particular, we review the legal nature of the UN sanctions against North Korea, what could hinder inter-Korean economic cooperation, and in what cases the sanctions on North Korea can be lifted in accordance with the requirements for the lifting of the UN sanctions on North Korea. Most inter-Korean economic cooperation is difficult to realize, given the contents of the UN Security Council's tougher sanctions against North Korea since 2016. South Korea should also join the UN Security Council resolution, as it is legally binding on member states and has priority over other treaty obligations. Then, is it possible to promote inter-Korean economic cooperation exceptionally in the current UN sanctions against North Korea? The UN Security Council's resolution on sanctions against North Korea has the phrase “in light of the DPRK’s compliance with the provisions of the resolution,” so the possibility of lifting sanctions against North Korea depends on the North's compliance and the acceptance of the UN Security Council. When objective reality of the international community is reviewed, it can be seen that UN sanctions against North Korea and inter-Korean economic cooperation are incompatible in both practical and legal aspects. At the same time, inter-Korean economic cooperation will be difficult to realize politically and diplomatically unless North Korea's denuclearization and missile issue are advanced in the future. Therefore, new and realistic measures to resume inter-Korean economic cooperation should be sought. 현재 남북경협은 유엔을 비롯한 국제사회의 대북제재의 영향으로 교착 상태에 있다. 2016년부터 유엔 대북제재가 대폭 강화되면서 한국 정부가 ‘5·24 조치’ 등 독자제재를 해제하더라도 유엔 대북제재가 해제되지 않으면 남북경협을 추진하기 어려운 상황이다. 다시 말하면 유엔 대북제재는 향후 남북경협 재개에 매우 중요한 변수가 된 것이다. 실제로 최근 우리 정부의 남북경협 재개 움직임에 대하여 미국을 비롯한 국제사회는 유엔 대북제재에 근거하여 확고한 반대 입장을 보이고 있다. 그렇다면 앞으로 국제사회의 대북제재 해제 없이 남북경협이 가능한 것일까? 이 질문에 대한 해답에 접근하기 위해 본 논문에서는 유엔 대북제재와 남북경협과의 양립성을 검토하였다. 국제사회의 대북제재 해제 문제는 상당 부분 정치적, 외교적 사안일 수 있겠지만, 이에 대해 법적인 측면에서 검토해 보는 것은 의미가 있을 것이다. 특히, 유엔 대북제재의 법적 성격과 어떤 내용이 남북경협의 걸림돌이 되는지, 그리고 유엔 대북제재의 해제 요건에 따라 어떤 경우에 대북제재가 해제될 수 있는지 살펴보았다. 2016년 이후 유엔 안보리에서 강화된 대북제재 결의 내용을 살펴보면 대부분의 남북경협은 실현되기 어려운 상황이다. 또한 유엔 안보리 결의는 회원국들에게 법적 구속력이 있으며, 회원국이 당사국인 다른 조약상의 의무에 우선하므로 한국도 이에 동참해야 한다. 그렇다면 현 유엔 대북제재 국면에서 예외적으로 남북경협 추진이 가능할까? 유엔 안보리 대북제재 결의에는 “북한의 이행상황에 비추어”라는 문구가 공통적으로 들어가 있으므로 대북제재의 해제 가능성은 북한의 이행과 유엔 안보리의 수용 여부에 달려 있다고 볼 수 있다. 남북한의 경제협력이 재개되었으면 하는 뜨거운 마음을 잠시 내려놓고 국제사회의 객관적인 현실을 살펴본다면 현실적 측면과 법적 측면에서 모두 유엔 대북제재와 남북경협은 서로 양립하기 어렵다는 것을 알 수 있다. 이와 함께 앞으로 북한의 비핵화와 미사일 문제 해결이 진전되지 않는다면 정치적, 외교적으로도 남북경협은 실현되기 어려울 것이다. 따라서 남북경협 재개를 위한 새롭고 현실적인 방안이 모색되어야 할 것이다.

남북경협 재개를 위한 유엔 안보리·한국·미국의 대북제재 검토

정민정(Chung, Min Jung) 충북대학교 법학연구소 2018 法學硏究 Vol.29 No.2

Ⅰ. 서론 Ⅱ. 남북경협 재개를 위한 유엔 안보리 대북제재 결의 검토 Ⅲ. 한국의 대북제재에 관한 국내법 Ⅳ. 미국의 대북제재에 관한 국내법 Ⅴ. 결론

Optical Illusion : Did Inter-Korean Economic Cooperation Really Increase More in the Progressive Government than in the Conservative Government?

Dongho Jo 이화여자대학교 통일학연구원 2022 Journal of peace and unification Vol.12 No.3

The general image of South Korea's progressive government is positive for inter-Korean economic cooperation and the conservative government is negative. This study evaluates how well this image fits with reality. The results are summarized as follows. First, the conservative government was just as active in expanding inter-Korean economic cooper-ation as the progressive government. However, the political and security situation on the Korean Peninsula turned relatively negative to the conservative government. Second, not only the legalization of inter-Korean economic cooperation but the first economic cooper-ation agreement, the first economic talks, and the first assistance were made by the con-servative government. Third, the year 2015 under the Park Geun-hye administration marked the highest level of inter-Korean trade. Based on the presidential term, the Lee Myung-bak administration recorded the biggest volume of inter-Korean trade. Fourth, the distortion of statistics greatly contributed to the perception that inter-Korean economic cooperation had grown in the progressive government. These findings imply that the gen-eral image differs from the actual facts. Inter-Korean economic cooperation in the con-servative government was by no means smaller than in the progressive government. In the progressive government, humanitarian aid and the Kaesong Industrial Complex produced the effect of making the inter-Korean economic cooperation appear larger than it was, whereas the conservative government's suspension of inter-Korean trade and the closure of the Kaesong Industrial Complex created an illusion that the inter-Korean economic co-operation seemed smaller than it really was.

남북경협 법제도화 방안으로서의 남북한 경제협력강화약정(CEPA) 검토

정민정 중앙법학회 2022 中央法學 Vol.24 No.4

Corresponding to the denuclearization process carried out through certain stages for a considerable period of time, the resumption of bilateral trade between the two Koreas will surely become a useful negotiating tool for resolving the North Korean nuclear issue at some point in the future. Inter-Korean trade is an area that must be expanded for the future of the Korean Peninsula. However, with the reinforcing of World Trade Organization (WTO) norms, it is difficult to view interKorean trade as an internal problem and there are issues in international trade law that need to be addressed legally and institutionally for smooth inter-Korean trade. To ensure that inter-Korean trade can be protected as one economic bloc within the WTO system, the first task to be pursued is the conclusion of the inter-Korean Closer Economic Partnership Arrangement (CEPA). In the short term, the inter-Korean CEPA can prevent inter-Korean trade from violating the obligation of non-discriminatory treatment under the WTO agreement. In the long term, it can be an important driver for North Korea to reorganize its economic system by establishing an institutional framework that promotes inter-Korean exchanges. Economic cooperation between the two Koreas is a transaction unique to a divided country, and has both the characteristics of intra-ethnic transactions under domestic law and international transactions (Articles 12 and 26 of the Inter-Korean Exchange and Cooperation Act). If interKorean economic cooperation is resumed and the scale of the exchanges expand, other WTO member countries may raise objections on the grounds of violating the most-favored-nation treatment clause and the Agreement on Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCMA) regulation. As a way to resolve these problems, we consider (1) a plan to revise the WTO accession protocol, (2) a plan to obtain exemption from WTO obligations, (3) a plan to conclude a preferential trading agreement citing the enabling provisions of developing countries, (4) a plan to conclude an FTA between the two Koreas, and (5) a plan to conclude a CEPA between the two Koreas. In the current international trade law regime, as a way of institutionalizing inter-Korean economic cooperation, the interKorean CEPA agreement in (5) is the most appropriate alternative. This is because CEPA can reflect the special relationship between the two Koreas which is one country, two systems to the inter-Korean economic cooperation system, and because it is a provisional agreement, it can be exempted from fulfilling WTO obligations for a considerable period of time. Wit h t he sig n i n g of t he CEPA , (1) t he t wo Korea s c a n obt a i n international approval for the tariff-free transaction bet ween the two sides, (2) can justify inter-Korean economic cooperation in the multilateral trading system of the WTO in terms of international trade law, and (3) through the reorganization of industries in the two Koreas and expansion of inter-Korean trade, it can create economic benefits for both sides. In addition, (4) if the CEPA acts as a catalyst to change the North Korean economy, the two Koreas can secure support from the international community for political and economic integration led by the two Koreas based on the principle of self-determination. Since the procedure for signing the inter-Korean CEPA and the scope of domestic legal effect will follow the provisions of the Inter-Korean Relations Development Act, the possibility of a conflict between the inter-Korean CEPA and domestic law seems remote. In addition, since the promotion of the inter-Korean CEPA itself is a work to prepare rules for trade and investment which is a prerequisite before the start of specific trade activities, it does not correspond to the types of actions specified by the UN Secu rit y Cou ncil resolutions on Nor th Korea sanctions and the domestic laws related to US sanctions on North Korea. Of course, UN and US sanctions on North Korea must...

남북한 지식재산권의 협력 및 발전 방안 고찰 -중국과 대만의 지식재산권 협력에 대한 시사점을 중심으로 -

김정진 중국지역학회 2019 중국지역연구 Vol.6 No.2

Inter-Korean relations have recently improved on the back of the North's willingness to denuclearize. This will be not only effect positive factor for the South's export, but could also have a positive effect on economic integration between South and North Korea as the North Korean economy grows. Currently, the seven inter-Korean economic cooperation projects are more likely to be realized, which includes the connection of inter-Korean railways and roads, the light-water reactor project, the resource development project, the Kaesong Industrial Complex, the Mount Geumgang project, the shipbuilding cooperation complex and the joint use of the Han River estuary project. Inter-Korean economic cooperation will not only create a strong synergy effect that further strengthens the development of the Korean people, but will also play an important driver for economic growth in Northeast Asia. The expansion of inter-Korean exchanges, which are aimed at economic cooperation between two Koreas, results in the cooperation of intellectual property. Economic cooperation and the cooperation in intellectual property rights are necessary for economic growth. Nonetheless, it is true that there are many difficulties in cooperation with intellectual property rights because of the lack of experience in economic cooperation due to the political specificity of the two Koreas. When searching for the measures of cooperation in economic and intellectual property right between two Koreas, we could refer to the experience between China Taiwan, which is very similar to our geography, politics, and economic relations. Based on the experience between China and Taiwan in intellectual property rights as maintaining political and economic relations under the slogan of "one china", the study will suggest good implications for the cooperation of intellectual property rights through inter-Korean economic cooperation. 북한의 비핵화 의지에 힘입어 최근 남북관계가 개선되었다. 이는 수출에 긍정적 요소로 작용할 뿐만 아니라, 북한경제가 성장하면 남한과 북한의 경제통합에도 긍정적인 효과를 줄 수 있을 것이다. 현재, 현실화 가능성이 높은 남북 경제협력사업은 남북철도와 도로연결사업, 경수로사업, 자원개발사업, 개성공단, 금강산사업, 조선협력단지, 한강하구 공동이용사업 등의 7개 사업이다. 남북한의 경제협력은 한민족의 발전을 더욱 강화하는 강력한 시너지 효과를 이끌어 낼 뿐만 아니라, 동북아 지역의 경제성장에 있어서도 중요한 동력으로 작용할 것이라 본다. 이처럼 남북한의 경제협력을 위시한 남북교류의 확대는 지식재산권 협력으로 귀결된다. 경제협력과 지식재산권의 협력은 경제성장에 필연적이라 할 수 있는데, 남북한의 정치적 특수성으로 인하여 경제협력 경험이 적어 지식재산권 협력에도 많은 어려움이 있는 것이 사실이다. 남북한의 경제협력 및 지식재산권 협력 방안의 모색은 우리와 지리, 정치, 경제 관계가 매우 유사한 중국과 대만 간의 경험을 참고할 수 있을 것이다. 줄곧 하나의 중국을 내세워 정치 및 경제관계를 유지하고 있는 중국과 대만의 지식재산권 협력 경험을 거울삼아 남북한 경제협력으로 인한 지식재산권 협력에 좋은 시사점을 제시할 수 있을 것이라 생각된다.

남북 4개 경협합의서의 공법적 검토 - 합의서의 법적 성격과 효력 및 민족내부거래성을 중심으로 -

조영승 한국비교공법학회 2019 공법학연구 Vol.20 No.2

This article is about the legal issues surrounding the four KCTU agreements on the occasion of the 20th anniversary of the four inter - Korean economic cooperation agreements. The four Economic Cooperation Agreement is an agreement that contains basic contents on inter-Korean exchanges and cooperation, and It is an agreement on prevention of double taxation, open account, guarantee of investment, and settlement of business disputes. However, unlike other inter-Korean agreements, it has been approved by the National Assembly and has been granted legal effect. In this regard, it examines the problem of the legal nature of the four Economic Cooperation Agreement and the intra - national transaction nature of the four Economic Cooperation Agreement, presents the problems, makes a legislative review and concludes. First of all, the four economic cooperation agreements contain the expression “transactions within the nation, not between the countries and the country,” so it can hardly be regarded as a treaty. However, first, there is a question of whether the passage of the Parliamentary approval under Article 60 of the Constitution is justified in the Inter-Korean Agreement, not the Treaty. And second, whether the passage of the Parliamentary approval under the Inter-Korean Relations Development Act is justified. In addition, it examines whether the four Economic Cooperation Agreements have the characteristics of ‘transactions within the nation’, and discusses whether they should be reflected if they do not exist. Inter-Korean economic cooperation is an essential premise for peaceful reunification. In order to activate and stabilize inter-Korean economic cooperation, it will be necessary to establish legal and institutional apparatus for inter-Korean enterprises. Considering the legal issues and realistic problems surrounding the Economic Cooperation Agreement, it is desirable to interpret the North as a “state” in inter-Korean exchanges and cooperation and interpret the inter-Korean agreement as a “treaty”. In addition, there is a concern that ‘transactions inside the nation’ may hinder unified interpretation of the law. 이 글은 남북 4개 경협합의서 작성 20주년을 맞아 4개 경협합의서를 둘러싼 공법적문제를 다루고 있다. 4개 경협합의서는 남북 교류․협력에 관한 기본적 내용을 담고 있는 합의서로, 이중과세방지, 청산결제, 투자보장, 상사분쟁해결에 관한 합의서를 말한다. 그런데 이는 다른 남북합의서와는 달리 국회의 동의를 받았고 법적효력을 부여받고 있다. 이와 관련하여 4개 경협합의서의 법적 성격에 관한 문제와 4개 경협합의서의 민족내부거래성을 살펴보고 문제점을 제시하고 입법론적 검토를 하고 결론을 내리고 있다. 우선 4개 경협합의서는 모두 ‘나라와 나라사이의 거래가 아닌 민족내부의 거래’라는표현을 담고 있으므로, 조약이라고 보기는 힘들다고 할 수 있다. 그러나 첫째, ‘조약’이아닌 ‘남북합의서’에 헌법 제60조의 국회 동의를 거치는 것이 정당화 되는 것인지, 둘째, 법률인 남북관계발전법에 따른 국회 동의 절차를 거치는 것은 정당화 되는 것인지 등의문제를 제기하고 검토하고자 한다. 더불어 4개 경협합의서가 내용적으로 ‘민족내부의 거래’의 성격을 지니고 있는지 살펴보고 만약 그러한 성격이 없다면, 이를 반영하여야 할것인지 여부에 대해서 논하고 있다. 남북경협은 평화통일을 위한 필수적인 전제라고 할 수 있다. 남북경협을 활성화 시키고 안정화시키기 위해서 남북 기업을 위한 법적․제도적 장치의 마련이 필요할 것이다. 경협합의서를 둘러싼 법적 문제 및 현실적 문제를 고려한다면, 남북 교류․협력에 있어서는 북한을 ‘국가’로 인정하고, 남북합의서는 ‘조약’으로 해석할 수 있는 해석론이 바람직하고, 법적․제도적 구비에 적합하다고 보인다. 더불어 ‘민족내부의 거래’는 통일적인법해석을 저해할 우려가 있다

개성지역 남북합영회사의 법적 쟁점에 관한 연구

김진목 원광대학교 법학연구소 2023 圓光法學 Vol.39 No.2

In 2010, with the implementation of the May 24th measures, inter-Korean economic cooperation was suspended in all areas except the Kaesong Industrial Complex. Then, in 2016, with the closure of the Kaesong Industrial Complex, all inter-Korean economic cooperation came to a halt. The joint venture enterprises in inter-Korean economic cooperation were mainly concentrated in the Pyongyang region. However, there was a case of inter-Korean economic cooperation in the form of a joint venture enterprise outside the Kaesong Industrial Complex that could be accessed using the entry and exit procedures of the Kaesong Industrial Complex. South-North Equity Joint Venture Enterprise in Kaesong can utilize the industrial, transportation, and transit facilities of the Kaesong Industrial Complex and has the advantage of active participation by North Korea, which holds shares. In the Equity Joint Venture Act, it is necessary to clarify the criteria for setting land usage fees, ease the all-out agreement system, and ensure education for workers. In addition, it is necessary to fairly define subsequent procedures in cases where consultation is impossible. Under the North-South Economic Cooperation Act, it is necessary to simplify the North's project approval process and stipulate that the North should manage its property in good faith, at least to a minimum extent, in special circumstances. The law on the development of inter-Korean relations needs to clearly define the special relationship between North and South Korea and elevate the legal status of the inter-Korean agreements to the level of general treaties. The law on inter-Korean exchange and cooperation should clearly stipulate in writing the procedures for obtaining North Korean visit approvals and for importing and exporting goods, and should minimize the time required for these processes. The agreement on investment protection between North and South Korea should specify in detail the abnormal issues that impede economic cooperation and provide for step-by-step investment protection accordingly. Regarding the agreement on the resolution of commercial disputes between North and South Korea, the follow-up procedures of the agreement should be promptly carried out, and the establishment of a governing law that applies to both North and South Korea is necessary. The inter-Korean agreement went through the legislative approval process outlined in Article 60, Paragraph 1 of the Constitution, thereby establishing its legal validity. However, due to North Korea's non-compliance, it has become practically ineffective. However, as North Korea has not explicitly rejected the validity of the agreement, it is not advisable to disregard the agreement and its provisions in preparation for future inter-Korean cooperation. North Korea has been attempting to improve its external economy through scientific and technological exchanges, economic development zones, and other means since the 2010s. However, the situation has worsened due to North Korea's nuclear tests leading to U.S. sanctions and the impact of COVID-19. Due to COVID-19, there have been zero exchanges of people between North and South Korea for a period of two years starting from 2021. In the current tense situation of strained inter-Korean relations, inter-Korean economic cooperation should be carried out flexibly and adaptively, taking into account the interests of both North and South Korea and contributing to their reunification, in accordance with the dynamics of inter-Korean and international relations.

남ㆍ북 경제협력 활성화를 위한 법제 정비방안

신현윤(Shin Hyun-Yoon) 한국법학원 2008 저스티스 Vol.- No.106

지난 2000. 6. 15 남북정상회담 이후 본격적으로 이루어지기 시작한 남북경협은 그 동안 문민정부와 참여정부를 거치면서 크게 진전하고 있다. 지난 2월 이명박 정부의 출범 이후, 그리고 최근의 금강산 관광객 총격 피살사건 등으로 최근 남북관계가 전반적으로 경색된 국면으로 전환되고 있으나, 북한 핵문제가 해결되고, 남북간 화해무드가 조성될 경우 남북경협은 탄력을 받아 보다 활성화될 것이며, 남북경제공동체 관계로 한 단계 업그레이드 될 수 있을 것으로 기대된다. 이 경우 새로운 차원의 남북경협의 추진 및 안정화를 위해 이제까지 시행되어 온 우리의 경협관련 법제에 대한 재정비가 이루어져야 할 것이다. 남북경협 활성화를 위한 법제의 재정비는 1차적으로는 현행 경협관련 법제와 주변법률의 미비점과 장애요인을 제거하고 남북경협 관련 법 규제의 완화 및 관련절차 간소화에 중점을 두어야 할 것이나, 향후 남북발전 기본계획에 따른 대북투자사업의 확대 및 경제공동체 형성ㆍ발전단계에 따라 경협관련법령 전체를 체계적으로 재정비하고 통일에 대비한 법적 인프라 구축까지를 염두에 두고 관련 법제도 보완작업을 지속적으로 추진하여야 한다. 이와 함께 남북경협법제의 정비는 많은 경우 남한이 일방적으로 제도를 갖추었다고 완성되는 것이 아니라 쌍방이 함께 노력해야 하는 바, 북한의 협조와 이에 상응하는 조치가 요구되기도 한다. 따라서 중장기적으로 「남북경제공동체」 형성에 필요한 법제를 정비함에 있어 북한당국과의 협의를 요하거나 협조가 가능한 부분에 있어서는 상호협력을 통해서 이루어 나가는 것이 안정적이라고 할 수 있다. 그밖에 향후 지속적인 남북경협관련 법제정비를 위해서는 통일부 내에 남북교류협력법제정비위원회를 설치할 필요가 있다. 이 위원회에서 통일부 담당 공무원과 외부 전문가 및 관련 부처 공무원들이 공동으로 경협관련법령의 체계적 정합성을 검토하고, 이제까지의 남북교류협력과정에서 특별히 수정이 필요한 절차나 규정이 있는지 등이 실태를 조사하는 한편, 법제상의 문제점을 도출하여 종합적으로 개선방안을 마련하는 작업을 진행할 필요가 있다. 이와 함께 남북경협을 비롯한 여러 분야의 교류협력 활성화를 위한 법제도적 기반을 구축하기 위해 남북의 공동노력이 있어야 할 것이다. 북측과도 경협관련 법제도를 논의하기 위한 통로로서 이미 남북기본합의서에서 합의한 바와 같이 남북법률위원회를 구성하여 가동할 필요가 있다. 이 법률위원회가 발족하게 되면, 남북관계발전에 저해되거나 남북경협의 활성화에 걸림돌이 되는 법제를 정비하고 그 개선방안을 모색할 수 있을 것이다. Since the summit talk between South and North Korea in June 15th 2000, the economic cooperation between South and North Korea had been dramatically improved and developed. Obviously. during the last one decade under Kim Dae Jung and Roh Moohyun administration in South Korea, the Korean peninsula was in detente. The friendly environment between South and North Korea however, has not continued as the newly elected Lee Myong Bak administration came to the power in South Korea. Especially, the incident that a south korean touristwas shot to death at Kumkang Mountain by North Korean soldiers aggravated the South-North relationship more. Nonetheless, the economic cooperation of South and North Korea is expected to be developed more in the near future, as long as North Korean nuclear problem is solved and South-North reconciliation resumes. Then, more integrated and advanced economic cooperation between South and North will be achieved. In order to prepare for the more integrated and advanced economic cooperation in Korean peninsula, our legal system on South-North Korea economic cooperation should be revised and newly legislated. The properly rearranged legal system will stabilize the South-North relations and develop the new dimension of inter-korean economic cooperation. In order to achieve these aims, the present legal system should be revised in order to fill the gap that existing laws overlook and to remove legal hindrances that have stymied economic cooperation between South and North. In addition, the present legal system should be revised so that unnecessary regulations are abolished and the process of economic cooperation is simplified. Furthermore, in accordance with future basic plan on South-North development, statutes that are related to economic cooperation should be revised systematically. The revision has to take into consideration implementation of legal infra structure for reunification in Korean peninsula as well. Maintenance and overhaul of legal system is not able to be completed by the unilateral attempt by the South Korea. Rather, this could be accomplished by bilateral endeavor between South and North Korea. Consequently, cooperation from North Korean authorities is inevitable in order to achieve Economic Community between South and North. In addition, it is necessary to institute "the Committee on Arrangement of Inter-Korean Exchanges and Cooperation Laws" (hereinafter "the Committee"). The Committee will be composed of officials in the ministry of reunification and outside experts on Korean peninsula. The Committee will scrutinize the relevance of legal system on the South and North Cooperation, and examine whether existing regulations and procedures in economic cooperation are required to be revised. In addition, the Committee will search for problems in legal system and rectify legal systems if problems are found. Besides, South and North should collaborate to establish the foundation for legal systems that will foment cooperation in many areas as well as economic cooperation between two Koreas. In this sense, it is recommendable to organize a committee that will harmonize South and North Korean legal systems, as South and North Korea agreed in principle to establish this committee under "the South and North Basic Agreement". Through this committee, South and North Korean government authorities will effectively share opinions in order to attain synchronization in legal systems. Furthermore, this committee is expected to revise legal systems in South and North Korea that have prevented two Koreas from cooperating with each other. As such, this committee will be a successful vehicle that is able to search for the improvement in collaboration between South and North.

남북경협의 ‘정치․군사적 리스크’ 극복 가능성*

박병철,주인석 한국통일전략학회 2020 통일전략 Vol.20 No.2

This study aims at analyzing features of inter-Korean economic cooperation to date which repeats progress and interruption due to political military factors and at presenting a direction for new economic cooperation between two Koreas in the future. The Gaeseong Industrial Region has experienced fluctuations not by economic risks but by political military ones and recently faced a total suspension. Unless we do not learn lessons for the new advance from the past experiences, then these experiences are utterly meaningless. Currently in the first half of the year 2020, stagnant North Korea-USA and inter-Korean relations have made the drive for economic cooperation between two Koreas completely halted. A skeptical question whether to promote such economic cooperation repeating progress and suspension can be asked. However, as the past history of economic cooperation reminds us of the process of resumption after stop because two Koreas and the United States required, we can’t entirely rule out continuing the existing economic cooperation or beginning a new one. In other words, reasons to busily prepare for economic cooperation that will unexpectedly start again lie in the past experiences. Thus, this research proposes a necessity to change into the paradigm of making economic profits as a way for overcoming or avoiding ‘political military risks’. Especially, it suggests a necessary step to prepare for economic cooperation in the great perspective of North-east Asian economic development not just exclusive inter-Korean economic cooperation by not relying on ‘big decisions’ by political leaders but joining central government, local governments and private businesses. The New Economic Initiative of the Korean Peninsula of the Moon Jae-in Government reflects this view and so is assessed as advanced. However, this initiative is also in the frame of exclusive intergovernmental cooperation and thus cannot help facing some political military risks. A new perspective and promotion plan for the economic cooperation model is needed on the basis of the support of the central government and the cooperation between local governments and private businesses. 본 연구의 목적은 정치군사적 요인에 의해 진전과 중단을 반복해 온 지금까지의 남북경제협력을 특징을 분석하고, 향후 새로운 남북경협을 위한 방향을 제시하는 것이다. 그동안 개성공단과 같은 남북경협의 경험은 경제적 리스크보다는 정치군사적 리스크에 의해 부침을 겪어오다가 최근에 와서 전면적 중단 사태를 맞았다. 과거의 경험으로 통해 새로운 진일보를 위한 교훈을 얻지 못한다면 과거의 경험은 전혀 의미가 없는 일이다. 2020년 초중반 현재 북미관계 및 남북관계가 경색되면서 남북경협의 추진은 전면적으로 중지된 상태에 있다. 진전과 중단을 반복하는 남북경협을 계속 추진해야 할 것인가라는 회의적인 질문이 제기될 수 있다. 그러나 과거 남북경협의 역사가 보여 주듯이 중단되었다가도 남·북·미 3국의 필요에 의해 다시 재개되는 과정을 기억한다면, 기존 경협의 계속, 혹은 새로운 남북경협의 시작을 전면 배제하기는 어렵다. 다시 말해서 언제 시작될지 모르는 남북경협에 대한 준비를 게을리 해서는 안 되는 이유 역시 그간의 경험 속에 내재해 있는 것도 사실이다. 따라서 본 연구는 그간의 ‘정치군사적 리스크’를 극복하거나 피할 수 있는 방안으로 경제적 이익창출을 중심으로 하는 패러다임으로의 변화 필요성을 제기한다. 특히 정치지도자들 간의 ‘통큰 결정’에만 의존하기 보다는 중앙정부, 지방정부, 민간기업이 참여할 수 있고, 배타적인 경협방식보다는 동북아시아 경제발전이라는 큰 틀에서 남북경협을 준비할 필요성을 제시한다. 문재인 정부의 한반도 신경제구상은 이러한 방향에서 구상되었다는 점에서 진일보 한 것으로 평가할 수 있다. 다만 이 구상 역시 배타적인 정부간 협력 틀 속에 있기 때문에 정치군사적 리스크를 피할 수 없다는 한계가 있다. 중앙정부가 지원하고, 지방정부와 민간기업 간의 협력을 토대로 하는 남북경협모델을 위한 새로운 구상과 추진계획이 필요하다.

대북포용정책하의 남북경협 과제와 상생공영의 남북경협 발전 방향

권영경 사단법인 한국평화연구학회 2009 평화학연구 Vol.10 No.1

Inter-Korean economic cooperation under a policy of engagement is meaningful in that is transorms th confrontational relationship between the two Koreas to a relationship in which 'exchange and cooperation within confrontation' can be found, and a 'natural economic community' can link the two Koreas. However, the criticisms brought about a call for a new paradigm seeking development of not tangible quantity, but qualitt and form. The real elements of the North Korean nuclear issue and the issue of normalization of the North's regime are 'Korean Peninsular issues', and a new model of intrer-Korean economic cooperation taking into account these issues as well as the development of inter-Korean relations moving toward unification is needed. Looked at this way, the policy of co-existence and co-prosperity appears to be based on a realist approach. The co-existence and co-prosperity policy maintains the official unification plan of creating a national community, and maintains the foundation of engagement because of the basis of achieving peaceful unification through development of inter-Korean relations that build co-existence and co-prosperity as well as lead to denuclearization. However, this policy have a number of challenges. Because, in the process of North Korea's denucleariztion there are three realms of variables, those in South Korean policy, those in North Korean policy, and those in the political variables of the international society, and it is difficult to fine tune these variables and move forward. Therefore, taking into account these challenges, the futlure direction of inter-Korean economic cooperation and KIC development is the need for continued efforts to manage, erase, and/or substantialize unclear factors in inter-Korean economic relations. 국민의 정부와 참여정부의 대북포용정책은 기조는 동일하지만 실행적 차원에서 볼 때 차이가 있었다. 국민의 정부는 남북관계가 역사적 상호작용의 산물이라는 구성주의적 접근방법에 입각했다면, 참여정부는 경제협력의 확대가 평화를 정착시킨다는 자유시장주의적 접근방법에 의거했다고 할 수 있었다. 그 결과 국민의 정부하에서 남북경협이 남북관계의 구조적 변화에 역점을 두고 진행되었다면, 참여정부하에서는 양적인 확대에 역점을 두면서 남북경협 자체가 목적론으로 전화하는 문제점을 야기했다. 남북경협을 통해 북한의 변화를 촉진하고 남북경제공동체를 구축한다는 펌프정책(pumping policy)이 평화의 낙수효과에 사로잡히는 문제를 야기함으로써, 남북경협이 궁극적으로는 북한수요론에 입각해 추진되어야 한다거나 공적 협력이 주축이 되는 현실을 야기했다. 상생공영의 대북정책은 이러한 문제점을 인식하고 대북포용정책의 양적 성과를 인정하되 질적으로 변화된 남북경협정책을 추구하게 되었다. 남북관계의 현실적 관계를 고려하면서 남북경협을 추진하되 북한개발의 미래상도 제시하는 적극적 관여수단으로 제시하였다. 그러나 국제사회에서의 이른바 ‘북한문제’를 적극 활용해서 체제보장의 수단들을 획득하고자 하는 북한의 전략적 행동방식으로 인해, 상생공영 대북정책하 미래지향적 적극적 관여수단으로서의 남북경협정책의 추진이 쉽지 않은 현실이다. 게다가 북한 내부정세 및 다자적 협력틀의 향방에 의해서도 영향을 받는 남북경협의 환경으로 인해 원활한 정책의 추진에 애로가 조성될 가능성도 존재하고 있다. 따라서 정부는 비경제적 변수들이 남북경협에 개입되지 않도록 정부와 민간간의 실용주의적 역할 분담 기준을 새로이 구축하고, 단기적 차원의 남북경협 동력의 유지와 장기적 차원의 정책추진 전략을 상호 연관적 시각속에서 매트릭스화하는 세밀한 전략적 정책방안을 모색할 필요가 있다.