우리나라와 북한이 체결한 양자 간 영사협약의 내용 분석 및 비교 -영사관계에 관한 비엔나협약 내용과의 비교를 중심으로-

초록

The aim of this paper is to analyse consular conventions concluded by ROK and DPRK on the basis of the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations (hereinafter, Vienna Convention). Rok had concluded 4 bilateral consular conventions (with U.S.A., Nepal, Russia and China) and DPRK is presumed to have concluded 5 (with Soviet Union, Hungary, Romania, China and Czechoslovakia). The bilateral conventions which had been concluded by ROK sometimes follows the Soviet model of consular conventions. For example, the consular convention with Russia contains the typical Soviet type provisions requiring the consent of the receiving States when sending the head of the consular post and allowing broader privileges and immunities to the consular premises than those granted in the Vienna Convention. On the other hand, most of the consular conventions concluded by DPRK show the typical features of the Soviet model. For example, in appointing the head of the consular post, the consent of the receiving State is required; in giving assistance to the detained nationals, the request of the detainee is not required, thus, when the receiving State detains the nationals of the sending State, the receiving State automatically notify the relevant facts to the consular post; the inviolability of the consular premises is strengthened as is the case with the diplomatic premises, in some cases the private residences of the head of the consular post and also consular officers are also inviolable like the consular premises; the regime of honorary consular officers is not recognized. While DPRK tends to follow the Soviet model basically, once it joined the Vienna Convention, it follows the Vienna Convention model. For example, the consular conventions concluded with China and the former Czechoslovakia do not contain provisions which require the consent of the receiving State when appointing the head of the consular post.

키워드