earticle

영어

It could have had some meaning if Serious Accident Punishment Act(SAPA) had been limited to corporations (organizations) on the premise that Occupational Safety and Health Act and criminal constituent requirements were different from Corporate Manslaughter and Corporate Homicide Act 2007 of British. However, since SAPA overlaps with Occupational Safety and Health Act, it is difficult to expect many net functions to reduce serious accidents from the perspective of normative power and effectiveness. Like advanced countries for industrial accident prevention, it is an urgent and important task to normalize Occupational Safety and Health Act so that it can play a role as a basic law for occupational safety and health in criminal punishment. Rather than relying on ineffective regulations and heavy punishment, it is much more effective and justifiable to prevent serious accidents to elaborate on criminal constituent requirements and clearly define them so that companies that comply with the law can expect them. Making laws that are difficult for anyone to follow and being severely punished for not following them will only lead to a drop in trust in the law, formalizing compliance, and mass-producing criminals around small and medium-sized enterprises. The Enforcement Decree of SAPA also has virtually solved problems such as uncertainty of this law. Rather, there are many aspects that are confusing and that do not conform to the constitutional principles have been expanded. In such an unclear and unconstitutional state, it is difficult to achieve the effectiveness of preventing industrial accidents due to low predictability and difficulty in acting as a preventive standard, and it is highly likely to face unconstitutional lawsuits. It is difficult to avoid criticism that SAPA is inherently ambiguous in relation to safety and health related laws such as Occupational Safety and Health Act and loses its justification and balance in the punishment system. The current legal state can never be said to be a desirable state from the perspective of the development possibility of safety court principles and the effectiveness of accident prevention. It is a desirable legislative direction to revise the system and contents of SAPA or abolish SAPA while partially reflecting the purpose of SAPA in safety and health relations laws.

한국어

중대재해처벌법은 규범력, 실효성 등의 관점에서 볼 때 중대재해 감소에 순기 능보다는 역기능이 적지 않을 것으로 예상된다. 산업안전보건법이 형사처벌에 있어서도 산업안전보건의 기본법으로서의 역할을 할 수 있도록 정상화시키는 것 이 시급하다. 실효성이 부족한 규제와 과중한 처벌에 의존하는 것보다 범죄구성요건을 정교 하고 수범자들이 예상할 수 있도록 명확하게 규정하는 것이 중대재해 예방에 효 과적이고 정의로운 일이다. 중대재해처벌법 시행령 또한 이 법이 가지고 있는 불명확성, 법령 간의 충돌 등의 문제를 사실상 거의 해소하지 못하고 있다. 오히려 혼란스럽고 헌법원칙에 맞지 않는 부분이 확대된 측면도 적지 않다. 예측가능성이 낮아 예방기준으로 작용하기 어려운 상태로는 산업재해 예방의 실효성을 거두기 어려울 뿐만 아니 라 위헌소송에 맞닥뜨릴 가능성이 크다. 중대재해처벌법은 태생적으로 산업안전보건법 등 안전보건관계법과의 관계가 모호하고 형벌체계상의 정당성과 균형을 상실하고 있다는 비판을 피하기 어렵 다. 중대재해처벌법의 취지를 부분적으로 산업안전보건법 등 안전보건관계법에 반 영하면서 중대재해처벌법의 체계와 내용을 전면적으로 개정하거나 중대재해처벌 법을 폐지하는 것이 바람직한 입법방향이다.