기업의 환경책임에 관한 법적 고찰: 한국철강부지 오염에 대한 정화책임을 중심으로 = Koreans Environmental Liability System -Especially concerning the Former Korea Steel Mill Site Case

다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract)

Serious environmental contamination at the former Korea Steel Co. site exhibits typical complicated legal issues among various potentially responsible persons. The iron mill had been used for decades for by many different entities. In the past, it was common practice that they dump industrial wastes in the backyards. Recent closeout of the mill and transfer to a developer revealed all the secrets of the past contaminations. Current Soil Preservation Act defines the scope of potentially responsible parties broadly and characterizes as strict, retrospective and joint and several liability. Accordingly, government may issue order to cleanup to any affluent parties. Then they in turn may bring law suit against other potentially responsible parties. vicious circle will be continuing causing cleanup effort be distracted. Ultimately, the benign `polluter pays principle` will turn `everyone pays principle.` Cleanup cost itself could reach hundreds of millions dollars and could be a headache to any corporate financier. To avoid such a risk, developers would turn their interest from old industrial site to undeveloped pristine lands. Already, many old industrial sites which is suspicious for bad environmental practice in the past are in jeopardy not to transfer for any use. Facing this serious problem, we need to prepare better tuned liability system. First, to solve the complicated legal problems among multiple potentially responsible parties, there should be government entity which can arrange finding, negotiating, and allocating the proper responsibility. Second, there should be more reliable standard for allocating liability. Minimus responsible parties should be set aside from the beginning in the picture of the scheme. And for the portion of nonexisting parties should be undertaken by the government. Thirds, there should be clearer standard for innocent purchaser immunity. Fourth, the standard for retrospectivity must be cleared. Finally, we should revisit the question of how clean is clean. Currently Korean environmental standard has a list 16 contaminants and threshold contamination levels for mandatory cleanup. It is highly suspicious whether this is appropriate or not. Now it is time to reconsider to adopt the risk based standards.

참고문헌 (Reference)

1 이창훈, "환경위험책임에 대한 연구" 성균관대학교 2009

2 전경운, "환경사법론" 2009

3 김홍균, "환경법-문제 사례-" 홍문사 2007

4 홍준형, "환경법" 박영사 2005

5 김홍균, "토양환경보전법 책임체계의 새로운 방향: 브라운필드(Brownfields) 문제" 한국법학원 (110) : 254-279, 2009

6 박용하, "토양오염지역의 책임에 관한 우리나라, 미국, 영국, 독일, 네덜란드, 덴마크 법과 제도의 비교 분석 및 우리나라 정책개선방향" 3 (3): 31-58, 2004

7 황창식, "토양오염분쟁 및 대응, 환경교육교재. in: 토양환경관리반" 국립환경연구원 2001

8 蔡永根, "오염된 토양의 정화책임" 한국공법학회 30 (30): 15-15, 2002

9 김상용, "불법행위법" 법문사 1997

10 박종원, "미국의 브라운필드 문제와 그에 대한 법적 대응 : 브라운필드법을 중심으로" 한국환경법학회 29 (29): 227-258, 2007

11 김홍균, "미국 종합환경대응책임법(CERCLA)상의 책임당사자와 토양환경보전법상의 오염원인자" 24 (24): 2002

12 백재봉, "녹색성장과 기업의 녹색경영 전략" 2009

13 정회성, "경제개발과 환경보전에 대한 이해와 오해" 한국환경정책·평가연구원 4 (4): 1-17, 2005

14 "U. S. v. R. W. Meyer, Inc., 932 F. 2d 568, 575-76 (6th Cir. 1991);"

15 "U. S. v. A & F Materials Co., 578 F. Supp. 1249, 1256 (1984)"

16 Lloyd S. Dixon, "The Transaction Costs Generated by Superfund’s Liability Approach. in: Analyzing Superfund: Economics" 1995

17 Michael B. Gerrard, "Demons and Angels in Hazardous Waste Regulation: Are Justice, Efficiency, and Democracy Reconcilable?" 92 : 706-, 1998

18 "Amoco Oil Co. v. Borden, Inc., 889 F. 2d 664(5th Cir. 1989);"