미국 종합환경대응책임법(CERCLA)상의 책임당사자와 토양환경보전법상의 오염원인자 = Potential Responsible Parties under the CERCLA and Polluters under the Soil Environment Conservation Act

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

The Soil Envimnmnt Gmsavation Act holds the one who caused the soil mtamination strictly liable by providing that in a case where the damages cum, on account of soil contamination, the one who caused the contamination shall compensate for such damages and clean up the contaminatd soil. The Act resembles, in m y aspect, the comprehensive Enviromental Response, Compensation and Liability Act(CERCL4) of the united states. Above all tk Act specifies scope of pdlutgs Spmfmtirn of responsible patty m y slgrnficantly lessen the controvasy summhng the issue who is liable. However, a katd debate exists on the inhphtirn of the pvision and eventually . effectiveness arad efficiemy of the Act. For exarrple, the Act does not consides sharehollder, rlmnager, officer, dimtor, lenlder, parent mpmtion which has been discussed as potential responsible party in US. ?he Act includes a pason who cmgdxnsively succeed as a respmsitde pa-&, houwa; it is mt dm w h is tk cuqxhmm smexr. Fbtkmxq tk dqect d mcatim is linited to d omtam-& . `maradthus, the Act is not adxwite to handle water quality pollution such as surfax or gmmd water pollution stemming from soil contamination. In addition, tecause the subject is focused on the very limited facilities induung soil contamination, &cation is limited In addition, unlike to CERCLA, the Act 83es not incl& pascpl who arranged for disposal and transparter as and level of clean up, and thus m m v m y my still exist s m extent of liability. Meanwhile the issue which occur especially when the me who caused the contamination is laclang in funds, still remains to be solved a responsible party. Also the Act dos not provide mverable damages Above limits are overcome through legislative consickration in the near future. At this time, we must not forgot that too heavy liability likely to irduoe maral hamd and make responsible party to neglect his obhgations and thus reduce incentive to prevent frmn en-tal degradation. In this regard, we mst pay attention polluter`s liability under the Soil h-t ConsesvaticPl Act not to beccary3 anybcdy`s liability. For this, specification aml sLg3lmt of polluters, exclusion of di*a who produce gnaU ammt of pollutants and non-*s suhstanm from pdlutas, and dmission of non-retroactive effect are deserve psitive consihtion