Measures to improve ship inspection system in Korea by amending administrative crime provisions of the Ship Safety Act

Figures & data

Table 1. Amended and related provisions of the Ship Safety Act.

Article	Paragraph
Article 83 (Penalty)	Any of the following persons shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for not exceeding three years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won. <added> 13–2.A person who conducts affairs of survey, etc. under Article 60 (1) by fraud or other improper means; <added> 13–4.A person who conducts container inspection, etc. under Article 64 by fraud or other improper means; <added> 13–5.A person who conducts an inspection and grants approval related to dangerous goods under Article 65 by fraud or other improper means;
Article 60 (Delegation for Survey Affairs)	The Minister of Oceans and Fisheries may have the Korea Maritime Transportation Safety Authority established under the Korea Maritime Transportation Safety Authority Act (hereinafter referred to as the “Authority”) perform the following affairs concerning shipbuilding surveys, ship surveys, approval of drawings, etc. (hereinafter referred to as “affairs of survey, etc.”), on his/her behalf. In such cases, the Minister of Oceans and Fisheries shall enter into an agreement with the Authority, as prescribed by Presidential Decree. Shipbuilding surveys, issuance of shipbuilding survey certificates, and special shipbuilding surveys under Article 7 (1), (2), and (4); Special surveys and issuance of ship survey certificates under Article 8 (1) and (2); Intermediate surveys under Article 9 (1); Occasional surveys and issuance of temporary alteration certificates under Article 10 (1) and (3); Temporary navigation surveys and issuance of temporary navigation certificates under Article 11 (1) and (2); International convention surveys and issuance international convention certificates under Article 12 (1), (2), and (4); Approval of drawings and marks of approval under Article 13 (1) and (2); Deleted; Extending the term of validity of ship survey certificates and international convention certificates under Article 16 (2); Examining articles for ship use or small ships, issuing examination certificates, and marks of passing examination under Article 18 (9) and (10); Verifying articles for ship use or small ships, issuing written verification, and marks of verification under the provisos to Article 20 (3) and (4); Preliminary inspections, approval of drawings and marks of approval, issuance of Certificate of Articles for Ship Use, and marks of passing preliminary inspections under Article 22 (1) through (3); Approval of stability information under Article 28 (2) and (3); Confirming limited loads, etc. and issuance of written confirmations of limited loads, etc. under Article 34 (1) and (2); Preparing and entering the details of inspection registers of cargo handling appliances under Article 35 (1); Approval of cargo securing manual under Article 39 (1); Enhanced surveys under Article 42 (1); Towing surveys and issuance of towing certificates under Article 43 (1) and (2).
Article 64 (Delegation for Container Inspection)	The Minister of Oceans and Fisheries may have an agency prescribed and publicly notified by him/her (hereinafter referred to as “agency for inspection, etc. of containers”), as a person suitable for the standard of designation prescribed and publicly notified by him/her, perform the following affairs on his/her behalf: Container inspection under Article 23 (4); Mark of confirmation on CSC Safety Approval under Article 23 (5). Matters concerning the delegation and cancellation of delegation of an agency for inspection, etc. of containers under paragraph (1) shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree, and matters necessary for guidance and supervision of an agency for inspection, etc. of containers shall be prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries.
Article 65 (Delegation for Inspection and Approval Related to Dangerous Goods)	The Minister of Oceans and Fisheries may have an agency prescribed and publicly notified by him/her (hereinafter referred to as “agency for inspection, etc. of dangerous goods”), as a person suitable for the standard of designation prescribed and publicly notified by him/her, conduct an inspection of and grant approval for the loading, transport, storage, etc. of dangerous goods under Article 41 (2) on his/her behalf. Matters concerning the delegation and cancellation of delegation of an agency for inspection, etc. of dangerous goods under paragraph (1) shall be prescribed by Presidential Decree, and matters necessary for guidance and supervision of an agency for inspection, etc. of dangerous goods shall be prescribed by Ordinance of the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries.

Table 2. Cases involving the imposition of penalties for impeding transportation-related business operations.

Division	Automobile	Aircraft	Ship
Safety inspection related laws	Automobile Management Act, Enforcement Decree of the Automobile Management Act, Enforcement Rules of the Automobile Management Act, Regulations on Implementation of Automobile Inspection, Rules on Implementation of Comprehensive Automobile Inspection, etc.	Aviation Safety Act, Aviation Safety Act Enforcement Decree, Aviation Safety Act Enforcement Rules, regulations on designation and supervision of specialized inspection agencies such as aircraft type certification, flight test checklist management guidelines for each aircraft type, etc.	Ship Safety Act, Enforcement Decree of the Ship Safety Act, Enforcement Rules of the Ship Safety Act, Fishing Vessel Act, Enforcement Decree of the Fishing Vessel Act, Enforcement Regulations of the Fishing Vessel Act, scope of agency work related to fishing vessel inspection work, etc., administrative rules according to the Vessel Safety Act, etc.
Inspection agency related laws	Korea Transportation Safety Authority Act	Aviation Safety Technology Institute Act	Korea Maritime Transportation Safety Authority Act, Classification rules of KR
Case of punishment for the crime of obstruction of business (or crime of obstruction of official duties)	None	None	Many

(Source: Report of Seo J.H.).

Table 3. Comparison of punishment regulations for safety inspections in similar occupations.

Division	Punishment regulations	Remarks
Building supervision	<Standards for punishment for ‘those who report falsely’ during supervision> · Construction: Imprisonment of up to 2 years or a fine of up to 200 million won · Firefighting: Imprisonment of up to 1 year or fine of up to 10 million won · Housing: Fine of less than 5 million won · Electricity: Fine of less than 1 million won · Construction Technology Promotion Act: No punishment provisions for inspection/supervision activities	Given the intricate nature of ‘ship inspection,’ constraints in object accessibility, and the involvement of multiple individuals throughout the entire lifespan of a ship, ascertaining the cause-and-effect relationship between work activities and accidents is challenging in comparison to ‘supervision.’ There exist certain highly challenging aspects.
Transportation	· Water leisure: fine of less than 1 million won · Aviation: Fine of less than 2 million won · Car: imprisonment for up to 2 years or a fine of up to 20 million won (however, actual punishment is replaced by administrative measures such as fines or business suspension/cancellation)	It is challenging to locate instances in alternative legislative examples where comprehensive listings of inspections and certificate issuance activities are provided, along with the imposition of identical penalties.

Table 4. Comparison of punishment provisions for inspection action by ship surveyors in major shipping countries.

State	Penalty provisions for inspection actions by ship inspectors	Remarks
Bahamas (Merchant Shipping Act))	Active exemption from lawsuits and legal liability is granted for prosecutorial actions performed in good faith, including exemption for negligence. However, the scope of exemption may be excluded due to the presence of intent.	Guaranteed the independence and objectivity of inspectors and inspection agencies by actively protecting government functions
Canada (Shipping Act)
Japan (Ship Safety Act)	No provisions for the punishment of serious crimes associated with inspection activities. However, it should be noted that if a false report, refusal to report, obstruction, or evasion occurs in response to a report request from a delegated agency, a fine of up to 300,000 yen may be imposed.
China (Ship safety management rules)	In the event of misconduct or abuse of power by an inspector, appropriate administrative measures will be implemented in accordance with the relevant regulations, which may include the suspension of the ship inspector’s qualifications. No criminal sanctions will be imposed, even in cases where a serious accident or defect is caused by intentional actions.
Common law states	No provisions for penalties or sanctions in relation to inspection activities. There is precedent for granting immunity to inspection agencies and inspectors.	The sole disciplinary measure associated with inspectors pertains to instances of bribery.

Figure 1. Response rate by survey target.

Table 5. Summary of survey results.

			Ship survey company				Related company
Question		Total	KOMSA	KR	BV	Sub-total	Shipping	Ship building & Equipment	Sub-total
Number of respondents		188	32	30	44	106	28	54	82
1	Punishment regulations have a negative impact on ship surveyors	1.5	1.1	1.2	1.4	1.2	1.4	2.1	1.9
2	Impact of strengthened punishment regulations (multiple responses)
	① A chance for a thorough survey	11%	3%	13%	11%	9%	7%	17%	13%
	② Inducing evasion of survey responsibility	86%	91%	93%	91%	92%	86%	74%	78%
	③ Creating only mental fear/tension	35%	59%	43%	41%	47%	14%	20%	18%
	④ Performing rigid survey	74%	78%	80%	59%	71%	75%	81%	79%
	⑤ No effect	1%			2%	1%		2%	1%
3	Unfair discrimination in the shipping sector	1.4	1.1	1.1	1.3	1.2	1.3	1.8	1.6
4	Accidents can occur despite thorough survey	1.5	1.3	1.5	1.4	1.4	1.4	1.7	1.6
5	Major responsibilities in case of vessel damage during operation (multiple responses)
	① International Organization/Government	7%	6%	7%	9%	8%	7%	6%	6%
	② Ship building company	20%	28%	13%	27%	24%	7%	19%	15%
	③ Captain/Seaman	23%	66%	23%	16%	33%	7%	13%	11%
	④ Ship owner	45%	78%	63%	52%	63%	18%	24%	22%
	⑤ Ship surveyor	2%	3%		2%	2%	4%	2%	2%
	⑥ Investigation results need to be confirmed	74%	50%	73%	77%	68%	82%	83%	83%
6	Stakeholder perception
	① Negative impact on survey quality	1.6	1.2	1.4	1.7	1.5	1.5	2.1	1.9
	② Ambiguity of punishment provisions	1.5	1.2	1.2	1.5	1.3	1.5	1.8	1.7
	③ Impact on rigid survey performance	1.4	1.1	1.2	1.6	1.3	1.3	1.7	1.6
	④ Passing on damage to industry	1.6	1.3	1.4	1.6	1.5	1.4	1.9	1.7
	⑤ Awareness of the harshness of punishment	1.4	1.1	1.1	1.2	1.2	1.4	1.9	1.7
	⑥ Fear/anxiety after completing the survey	1.5	1.2	1.4	1.9	1.5
	⑦ Mental stress from punishment possibility	1.6	1.2	1.6	2.0	1.6
	⑧ Hope for job change	1.6	1.1	1.6	1.9	1.6
	⑨ Strengthening criminal punishment does not enhance safety	1.7	1.3	1.9	1.8	1.7
	⑩ Administrative disposition to surveyor can be sufficient	1.3	1.3	1.2	1.4	1.3
	⑪ Decreased private economic activity	1.9					1.4	2.1	1.9
7	Reduction of punishment subject to Special Surveys (first and 5-year surveys)	1.8	1.7	1.6	1.6	1.6	1.9	2.1	2.0
8	Abolition of punishment provisions of the Ship Safety Act	1.9	1.3	1.7	1.9	1.7	1.9	2.4	2.2

Table

Q 1: In 2015, the Ship Safety Act introduced a new penalty clause that could result in a prison sentence of up to three years. Do you believe that this penalty regulation will negatively affect the inspection work of ship inspectors?

Figure 2. Negative impact by punishment regulations.

Table

Q 2: In relation to the previous question, what do you believe will be the impact of the enhanced punishment regulations? (Multiple responses possible) ① This provides an opportunity to conduct a more comprehensive inspection than before. ② It inevitably becomes an opportunity for the surveyor to avoid their own responsibility rather than ensuring the safety of the ship. ③ It simply evokes a feeling of mental fear and tension in the surveyor. ④ When inspecting ships, rigid inspection tasks are performed, even though regulations can be open to flexible interpretation. ⑤ It has no effect.

Figure 3. Impact of strengthened punishment regulations.

Table

Q 7: Do you believe it is necessary to streamline the Ship Safety Act by reducing the 19 or more ship inspection items that can result in penalties to the most essential regular ship inspection (Article 60, Paragraph 1, 2)?

Figure 4. Reduction of punishment subject to Special Surveys.

Table

Q 8: The Ship Safety Act already includes provisions for the cancellation or suspension of delegated responsibilities for classification societies (Article 62 of the same Act) and the government’s measures for Liability of Compensation of Survey Agency (Article 67 of the same Act). Additionally, ship surveyors who fail to perform their ship survey duties correctly may be subject to punishment for obstructing business under the Criminal Act. If they accept a bribe, they may be considered public officials and face severe punishment under the Criminal Act. Considering this, do you think that abolishing the related provisions of the Ship Safety Act, which stipulate criminal punishment such as imprisonment for individual inspectors in relation to survey work, will ultimately help improve the quality of surveys and enhance ship safety?

Figure 5. Abolition of punishment provisions of the Ship Safety Act.

Table 6. Proposed amendment of the Ship Safety Act of Korea.

Current article	Amendment proposal
Article 83 (Penalty Provisions) Any of the following persons shall be punished by imprisonment with labor for not exceeding three years or by a fine not exceeding 30 million won:	Article 83 (Penalty Provisions) <same as left>
13–2.A person who conducts affairs of survey, etc. under Article 60 (1) by fraud or other improper means;	13–2.<delete>
13–4.A person who conducts container inspection, etc. under Article 64 by fraud or other improper means;	13–4.<delete>
13–5.A person who conducts an inspection and grants approval related to dangerous goods under Article 65 by fraud or other improper means;	13–5.<delete>
Article 83–2 <add>	Article 83–2 (Penalty Provisions) Any person who conducts an special survey or inspection under Article 60, Paragraph 1, Item 2, a container inspection under Article 64, or an inspection or approval related to dangerous goods under Article 65 by fraud or other improper means shall be liable to a fine of up to 3 million won.